Today I present a brief reflection on Sunday, providing some historic viewpoints on the Lord’s Day as summarized in various creeds and confessions. I do not think my commentary would be helpful or necessary:
The London Baptist Confession says:
As it is the law of nature, that in general a proportion of time, by God’s appointment, be set apart for the worship of God, so by his Word, in a positive moral, and perpetual commandment, binding all men, in all ages, he hath particularly appointed one day in seven for a sabbath to be kept holy unto him, which from the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ was the last day of the week, and from the resurrection of Christ was changed into the first day of the week, which is called the Lord’s day: and is to be continued to the end of the world as the Christian Sabbath, the observation of the last day of the week being abolished…The sabbath is then kept holy unto the Lord, when men, after a due preparing of their hearts, and ordering their common affairs aforehand, do not only observe an holy rest all day, from their own works, words and thoughts, about their worldly employment and recreations, but are also taken up the whole time in the public and private exercises of his worship, and in the duties of necessity and mercy.
The Heidelberg Catechism says:
…That I, especially on the sabbath, that is, on the day of rest, diligently frequent the church of God, (b) to hear his word, (c) to use the sacraments, (d) publicly to call upon the Lord, (e) and contribute to the relief of the poor. (f) Secondly, that all the days of my life I cease from my evil works, and yield myself to the Lord, to work by his Holy Spirit in me: and thus begin in this life the eternal sabbath. (g)
The Westminster Longer Catechism states:
The sabbath or Lord’s day is to be sanctified by an holy resting all the day, not only from such works as are at all times sinful, but even from such worldly employments and recreations as are on other days lawful; and making it our delight to spend the whole time (except so much of it as is to betaken up in works of necessity and mercy) in the public and private exercises of God’s worship: and, to that end, we are to prepare our hearts, and with such foresight, diligence, and moderation, to dispose and seasonably dispatch our worldly business, that we may be the more free and fit for the duties of that day…The sins forbidden in the fourth commandment are, all omissions of the duties required, all careless, negligent, and unprofitable performing of them, and being weary of them; all profaning the day by idleness, and doing that which is in itself sinful; and by all needless works, words, and thoughts, about our worldly employments and recreations.
The Canadian Convention of Southern Baptists has as a core belief:
The first day of the week is the Lord’s Day. It is a Christian institution for regular observances. It commemorates the resurrection of Christ from the dead and should be employed in exercises of worship and spiritual devotion both public and private and by refraining from worldly amusements and resting from secular employments work of necessity and mercy only being expected.
And finally, the average Evangelical says:
“Want to go to the mall after church?”
Comments (45) »
1. Kyle
September 24, 2006
5:02 PM
We need to be careful how we talk about the “sabbath.” Of the 10 Commdments, number 4 (“remember the sabbath and keep it holy”) is the only one not mentioned again in the New Testament; on the contrary, it is repeatedly abrogated (Colossians 2; Romans 14; et. al.). Consider the following by John Calvin:
“There were three reasons for giving this [fourth] commandment: First, with the seventh day of rest the Lord wished to give to the people of Israel an image of spiritual rest, whereby believers must cease from their own works in order to let the Lord work in them. Secondly, he wished that there be an established day in which believers might assemble in order to hear his Law and worship him. Thirdly, he willed that one day of rest be granted to servants and to those who live under the power of others so that they might have a relaxation from their labor. The latter, however, is rather an inferred than a principal reason.
“As to the first reason, there is no doubt that it ceased in Christ; because he is the truth by the presence of which all images vanish. He is the reality at whose advent all shadows are abandoned. Hence St. Paul (Col. 2:17) that the sabbath has been a shadow of a reality yet to be. And he declares elsewhere its truth when in the letter to the Romans, ch. 6:8, he teaches us that we are buried with Christ in order that by his death we may die to the corruption of our flesh. And this is not done in one day, but during all the course of our life, until altogether dead in our own selves, we may be filled with the life of God. Hence, superstitious observance of days must remain far from Christians.
“The two last reasons, however, must not be numbered among the shadows of old. Rather, they are equally valid for all ages. Hence, though the sabbath is abrogated, it so happens among us that we still convene on certain days in order to hear the word of God, to break the [mystic] bread of the Supper, and to offer public prayers; and, moreover, in order that some relaxation from their toil be given to servants and workingmen. As our human weakness does not allow such assemblies to meet every day, the day observed by the Jews has been taken away (as a good device for eliminating superstition) and another day has been destined to this use. This was necessary for securing and maintaining order and peace in the Church.
“As the truth therefore was given to the Jews under a figure, so to us on the contrary truth is shown without shadows in order, first of all, that we meditate all our life on a perpetual sabbath from our works so that the Lord may operate in us by his spirit; secondly, in order that we observe the legitimate order of the Church for listening to the word of God, for admin-istering the sacraments, and for public prayers; thirdly, in order that we do not oppress inhumanly with work those who are subject to us.”
[From “Instruction in Faith,” Calvin’s own 1537 digest of the Institutes, sec. 8, “The Law of the Lord”].
2. Michael Garner
September 24, 2006
5:26 PM
I think that reflecting on the thoughts of those who have gone before us on this matter is a good corrective. By and large, I think Christians have gone away from their roots (on this issue), probably to our own detriment.
However, I would be more inclined to completely agree with these statements if Jesus and the NT Authors didn’t seem so intent on breaking the Sabbath, didn’t seem so concerned about warning people not to fall back to the Sabbath, didn’t continually teach that the Sabbath is fulfilled in Christ and that we have Eternal Rest in Him.
In Christ alone,
mike
3. Chris Poteet
September 24, 2006
8:13 PM
The real question is — do you think that the Sabbath is a perpetual ordinace for New Covenant believers?
4. MarieP
September 24, 2006
8:21 PM
Wow….that’s amazing that the Canadian Convention of Southern Baptists still has the language it does, while the Baptist Faith and Message 2000 doesn’t.
Mike,
If Jesus didn’t keep the Sabbath, does that mean He didn’t fully obey God’s Law? If He didn’t fulfill the Law, what does that mean for those of us who claim the righteousness of Christ as our plea before God? Remember that the Pharisees added so much more to the day than God commanded, making it a day of drudgery rather than a day of delight.
This sermon might interest you all (sorry, Canadians may not be able to listen to Sermonaudio):
Arguments against the Sabbath Refuted
5. Jo
September 24, 2006
9:14 PM
I’ve been to the mall on Sundays and I’ve also gone grocery shopping. As a matter of fact, I’ve done shopping of all kinds on Sunday, and I consider myself to be a solid Bible-believing Christian. (!)
“The sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath.”
Hey, at least the above (hypothetical) person went to church BEFORE hitting the mall!!! :)
6. Michael Garner
September 24, 2006
9:30 PM
“If Jesus didn’t keep the Sabbath, does that mean He didn’t fully obey God’s Law?”
I guess my post did make it sound like I meant that. That was not my intent. My point was that Jesus continually went against the current-day notion of the Sabbath requirements and argued that men were not made for the Sabbath but the Sabbath for men. Further, His apostles did write against falling back into the Sabbath and especially trying to lord it over people.
I should note that I believe that current Christians can learn a lot from those statements. I think we are quite flippant about our worship. My point was that I would resist such strong statements given the overall thrust of the NT regarding Sabbath.
7. Jabbok
September 24, 2006
10:22 PM
OK, we’re home from the mall. Go Broncos!
8. David B. Hewitt
September 24, 2006
10:29 PM
Dr. Don Whitney had some good things to say about it in a class or two I took with him. He’s not a sabbatarian, and I think he presented some good arguments…. now if I could find my notes from the classes… :)
9. Phil
September 24, 2006
11:14 PM
And finally, the average Evangelical says: “Want to go to the mall after church?”
HA! If you want to do both, go to “Mall Church” — a new church (they call it “storefront”) in Oakrdge Mall in San Jose, CA. They’re affiliated (read: sponsored and funded) by the Reformed Church in America.
10. donsands
September 25, 2006
8:19 AM
I love to gather on Sunday with other believers and give thanks to the Lord for His great mercy.
I love to sing praises to the King of glory. I love to hear the Holy Word of God spoken by a genuine pastor/teacher of the Lord.
I love to pray with the saints, and to fellowship as well.
And I love to encourage and edify those who are having intense struggles in His grace and truth.
“One man esteems one day above another: another esteems every day alike. Let every man be fully assured in his owm mind.” Rom 14:5
11. bj
September 25, 2006
8:19 AM
I was convicted a few years ago about how I spent Sunday. God impressed on my heart that I was wasting time during the week and therefore putting myself in a position where Sunday was a day of busyness. So, now I try to handle tasks like grocery shopping, house cleaning, work, and so on Monday-Saturday, leaving Sunday afternoon for reflection, rest, or relaxed fellowship with friends.
12. Annette
September 25, 2006
9:58 AM
All I can say is, if you do church and then do that mall, how are you showing truly the importance of worshipping God in your life. Doesn’t Sunday and “doing church” just become another of the things you “do” and not really “are”?
Sunday needs to be day where we show what is truly important in our lives, otherwise it’s just another day and church is just another thing we do.
13. Rich B.
September 25, 2006
9:58 AM
1. The Sabbath was made when man was made - Mk. 2:27. It is a creation ordinance as marrige and labor are.
2. The Sabbath was incorporated into Old Covenant law via the Decalogue and the non-weekly Sabbaths. Marriage and labor were also incoporated into Old Covenant law.
3. The Sabbath is present in Old Testament prophecy concerning the New Covenant - Is. 56 (explicitly); Jer. 31:33 (implicitly).
4. The Old Covenant’s Sabbaths (i.e., weekly and non-weekly) are prophetically recinded in the Old Testament - Hos. 2:11 - and abrogated in the New Testament - Col. 2:11; etc..
5. The Sabbath is incorporated into the New Covenant via the Decalogue (Jer. 31:33) and Christ’s statement in Mk. 2:28.
6. The Sabbath under the New Covenant is called the Lord’s Day - Rev. 1:10. Just as the Sabbath in the Old Testament was “My Sabbath” so the Lord’s Day, the first day of the week, is the Lord’s Day. I believe “Lord’s” is a reference to our ascended Lord Jesus Christ. There are two times this word, “Lord’s,” is used in the NT; Rev. 1:10 and 1 Cor. 11:20. Both usages are in contexts clearly referring to Christ as resurrected and ascended. As the Old Covenant had a memorial meal and a memorial day, so with the New Covenant.
So it seems to me. :-)
14. Brian Thornton
September 25, 2006
10:20 AM
“Sunday needs to be day where we show what is truly important in our lives, otherwise it’s just another day and church is just another thing we do.”
Do you observe the day for the sake of worship…or do you observe worship for the sake of the day?
It is interesting that Paul addresses an issue similar to this when he talks in Romans 15 about a person regarding one day over another, and another person regarding everyday alike. Granted, I think he is primarily talking about those converted Jews who believed that all the Jewish days of observance (days of unleavened bread, passover, etc.) were required to be observed in order to truly be Christian (which probalby included the weekly observance of sabbath rituals)…but I think it can also apply to the issue of observing the ‘Sabbath’ today.
I find it interesting that, in the context of what Paul says, it is the one who holds one particular day above the others who is the weaker Christian. The stronger Christian is the one who regards everyday alike. I think it is important that care be taken here so that we do not add to the cross of Christ.
John Gill comments regarding Paul’s words in Romans 14:
The difference between these two lay here, the weak brother regarded a day for the sake of a day, as having by a positive law, he supposed to be in force, a superiority to another, and he regarded worship for the sake of this day; the stronger brother, though he also observed a day for divine worship, which is the Lord’s day, since there must be some time for it as well as place, yet he observed the day for the sake of worship, and not worship for the sake of the day:
15. Matthew R. Perry
September 25, 2006
10:20 AM
Thank you so much for this, Tim. Our declaration of faith here at Boone’s Creek Baptist Church addresses the Lord’s Day:
19. THE LORD’S DAY. We believe that the first day of the week is the Lord’s Day; and is to be kept sacred to religious purposes, by abstaining from all secular labor and sinful recreation, by the devout observance of all the means of grace, both private and public; and by preparation for that rest that remaineth for the people of God.
One who was interested in our church read this and would ask me questions such as, “Does this mean you cannot go out to eat?” I had to answer her that we are still working on making the Lord’s Day the Lord’s Day.
Good, good stuff, Tim.
16. GWilly
September 25, 2006
11:52 AM
Matthew (I still think of you as Chandler)
So, given that you are working to make the Lord’s Day the Lord’s Day (I don’t know how to do italics), do you go out to eat?
This became a topic of dicussion at my former PCA church a few years back. Should we forego a time of fellowship (we were already together) and convenience (there were many nearby restaurants) in order to keep some unbeliever, or non-attending believer, from violating the Sabbath? Causing another to work was the crux of our disagreement, rather than whether we were engaging in worldly activity. The majority decided to exercise their freedom and go out to eat. I’m sure we are not the only church that has wrestled with these things.
17. Brian Thornton
September 25, 2006
12:08 PM
If you make this Lord’s Day observance a requirement, aren’t you then putting yourself back under the Law?
Are you not adding to the cross of Christ?
Does anyone here who holds that the Lords’ Day should be observed in a certain way (i.e., not doing certain things, doing other certain things) wish to impose that on other believers? If so, then aren’t you guilty of the same thing the Judaizers were guilty of?
If I claim to be a believer, and after church I regularly go out to eat with my family and others, and then I go to a movie, or watch a game on TV with some friends, or go visit some relatives and spend the day there, etc., is it still possible for me to be a believer?
In other words, are you saying (those who are putting forth the doing of certain things and vica-versa on the Lord’s Day) that for me to be a Christian I must observe Sunday as you believe Sunday should be observed?
If so, how is this any different from those in Paul’s day who tried to require certain things, like circumcision, forbidding marriage, or abstaining from eating certain foods?
18. bj
September 25, 2006
12:56 PM
I don’t think that anyone is advocating a very specific policy for how to spend Sunday. I think the point is more that there should be a period of time in the week that we spend in deliberate reflection. When this became a conviction for me, I decided that if I wanted to fellowship with other believers after church, I could just as easily put a roast in the crock pot and whip up mashed potatoes while my guests munched on crackers. Sometimes others bring dishes. As a general rule, believers spend very little time in each other’s homes. This has proven to be a wonderful opportunity of deepening existing friendships and furthering acquaintances. We end up having good conversations about the Sunday School lessons or the sermon.
19. JHope
September 25, 2006
12:58 PM
As I have considered this issue in my own life, it seems to me that the larger, unspoken issue is that we (I) read one of these old creeds or catechisms, and my first thought is not, “Wow, a whole day to worship God! That would be wonderful; how can I make similar time in my schedule?” but “You mean I can’t do _________ and I have to, like, read my Bible or something instead?!?” It disturbs me to find this attitude in my heart— that of perceiving more pleasure in (fill in the blank) than in seeking God through study and meditation of His word and prayer (both public and private). And so I seek to grow in an “old-fashioned” observance of the Sabbath for the sake of training my soul to delight in God, not for the sake of legalism.
While I understand and appreciate the importance of seeking to understand the theological issues discussed above (because I am fully convinced of the authority of scripture), I also find the injunction to “love the Lord my God with all [my] heart…mind…soul and…strength” and to “cut off” from my life whatever causes me to sin. (Mark 12:30, Matt. 5:30)
20. Brian Thornton
September 25, 2006
1:11 PM
No one has yet to answer the question I was trying to ask above, but may have done poorly, which it this:
What exactly is required of the believer on the Lord’s Day? I am referring specifically to the time that Tim referred to in his post as “after church”.
If I go to the mall after three hours of worshipping my Savior on a Sunday, am I in sin?
21. theophilus
September 25, 2006
1:42 PM
Tim,
I see your post was dated “9/24/06”. That means you were blogging on the Sabbath. Shame, shame. ;)
Seriously, this became an issue for my family when we left an independent Baptist church and joined an OPC church (who were strict sabbatarians). We felt a little like we were being placed back under the law (no eating out, watching the Superbowl, etc.). However, I feel like our NT observance of the Lord’s Day is analagous to tithing— required as law in the OT, but freewill giving in the NT. The two are related, but not quite the same. (Please don’t start posting on tithing vs. NT giving; that’s not my point).
Similarly, I think observing the Lord’s Day by spending the day primarily focusing on the Lord, is great for our spiritual walks. However, I think I can be pharisaical by requiring someone else keep the same set of rules I do. If, however, I spend the day engaging in worldy pursuits, just like any other day, when I have the opportunity to spend it in a spiritually profitable way, I’ve got to ask myself about the true condition of my heart.
It’s a tough balance to achieve sometimes.
22. Fred
September 25, 2006
1:51 PM
I believe each person needs to examine their heart in this matter. Maybe our conscience is an issue here. We live in a society that is consumeristic, and entertainment laden. We in America have come to believe that entertainment and “freedom” are our inherent rights. Though most of us have “playtime ie Miller time” throughout the week, we believe that the weekend is made especially for us as we can enjoy our play better since we can relax not having to go to the shop or office. {at least some of us} Actual thoughts of God are minimal and sporadic through the week, except for maybe Wed evenings , if the boys don’t have a soccer game. First things first you know.
Now comes Sunday. We have been busy all week , working, rushing the kids to a game , a practice a reherrsal , or what have you. I want some time to myself, so God and thoughts of God will have to suffice for 2 hrs on Sunday morning. Our worship is halleluia , amen and lets watch the Browns (please pray for me, lol} We may even have a Sunday evening sevice, or a small group gathering, but many of us , if we are honest here, think , MAN!! I just don’t feel like going. Question is , is Why? Are we that tired? I dont think so. are we too busy? Maybe , but doing what? I contend that it is our love for Christ that is weak. So we hide behind the truth that the Sabbath was made for man and even that Jesus coming has set aside that requirement. Maybe He has, but He never set aside the requirement to love the Lord your God with all your heart , mind , soul and strength. He is understanding, we convince ourselves. We barely love Him through the week because understandably we are busy. So can we not try to set aside one day a week to rest from all our usual strivings and pleasureings , so that we can rest in the Lord, by imbibing His Word and allowing Him to spaek to us? Or is it just basically another day of shopping, working and playing just as all the rest of our lives, with God getting a few hrs a week, if we aren’t too busy.
I realise that there will be many that say they dont fit this sterotype, and that their situation is different and other excuses. But I believe when we say , whether explicitly or by implication, that we do not want to obey a command of the ten commandments, in spirit and not the letter, we are saying alot both about ourselves , and our love for God.
23. Kyle
September 25, 2006
2:41 PM
Fred said “Maybe our conscience is an issue here.”
I contend that our conscience is the ENTIRE issue here. The New Testament is replete with statements that abrogate the sabbath, thus removing its binding claim on the New Covenant believer. (These have been well documented in posts above, so I will not retread them here. See my John Calvin quote in comment #1.)
Romans 14 and 15, then, become our guideline for this issue. If you are convicted in your conscience that you should spend all of Sunday to rest and reflect, and that _______________ (fill in the blank) is outside that parameter, then you are bound to your conscience, because “whatever is not from faith is sin” (Romans 14:23). But if your conscience is not bound to that principle, then you are not required by your faith to observe it. And Paul’s command becomes crystal clear that the one who “eats” or “does not eat” (or observes a “sabbath” or does not observe a “sabbath”) is not to judge the conviction and practice of another with a differing belief. The principle that we all need to grasp in issues of conscience, like this one, is that we cannot hold other believers captive to our own consciences. If you are convicted that you should observe the Lord’s Day like it were the Sabbath, then you should do so. And if you are not convicted as such, then you are free to shop and play on Sundays after church (or before church, if you go in the evening. Oh wait, did I open another can of worms?….)
Another point that needs to be made is this: worship should be happening in our hearts and lives all week long, in everything we do. We should be daily reflecting on the grace and glory of our Savior, and offering ourselves as a living sacrifice in all things. (“Wheter you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.”) So I am not advocating neglecting our spiritual health for the sake of hanging out at the mall. What I would say is this: if hanging out at the mall on Sunday afternoon is causing me to neglect my spiritual growth and discipline, then there are greater problems in my heart than how strictly I am observing the Lord’s Day.
I’ve said too much already.
Peace.
24. donsands
September 25, 2006
2:51 PM
I have gone to the mall on Sunday’s. I remember sharing the gospel with a vendor. He was a very interesting guy.
I agree with Kyle it’s a conscience thing. And it’s a love the Lord with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength thing. And your neigbour as yourself thing.
In Nepal the Christians for the most aprt meet on Saturday’s. Thought I’d mention that.
25. Jabbok
September 25, 2006
4:47 PM
Who needs the mall when you can stay after church for the taco lunch which is sponsored by the youth to raise money to go to “Hell House” in October. Then you can play a couple games of ping-pong and shoot some hoops in the gym. Then you can visit the t-shirt table and buy a shirt that says, “Go to Hell House. It’ll scare Jesus into your heart.”
Food, games and shopping in the comfort of your local house of worship.
26. Rich B.
September 25, 2006
5:01 PM
Calvin’s view of the Sabbath is somewhat complex. For instance, here is his commentary on Gen. 2:3.
“…[W]e must know, that this is to be the common employment not of one age or people only, but of the whole human race. Afterwards in the Law, a new precept concerning the Sabbath was given, which should be peculiar to the Jews, and but for a season; because it was a legal ceremony shadowing forth a spiritual rest, the truth of which was manifested in Christ. Therefore the Lord the more frequently testifies that he had given, in the Sabbath, a symbol of sanctification to his ancient people. Therefore when we hear that the Sabbath was abrogated by the coming of Christ, we must distinguish between what belongs to the perpetual governments of human life, and what properly belongs to ancient figures, the use of which was abolished when the truth was fulfilled. Scriptural rest is the mortification of the flesh; so that the sons of God would no longer live unto themselves, or indulge their own inclination. So far as the Sabbath was a figure of this rest, I say, it was but for a season; but in as much as it was commanded to men from the beginning that they might employ themselves in the worship of God, it is right that it should continue to the end of the world.” ( John Calvin, Calvin’s Commentaries, Volume II, 106, 107)
I recommend Richard B. Gaffin’s book on Calvin and the Sabbath. It does a good job of presenting Calvin’s comprehensive view in light of the various nuances and shifts in Calvin’s teaching on this issue over the entire span of his writing career.
Here is a brief piece from Gaffin:
“There is not the slightest indication that Calvin held the remotest sympathy for those of a later day who argued that the Sabbath no longer exists, on the basis either that the Decalogue is not valid for the Christian era or that the fourth commandment alone has been abolished while the other nine are still in force, and who have appealed to Calvin in support of this view. Rather, it seems fair to say that Calvin is in clear opposition to any view of the Sabbath question which is based upon the idea of the abrogation of the whole or even of any one part of the Decalogue.” (Gaffin, Calvin …Sabbath, 31) I do not have the recent reprint by Christian Focus. The reference above comes from an old version no longer in print.
Rich B.
27. Brian Thornton
September 25, 2006
5:05 PM
Hey Kyle! You took all my thunder from my post #14! Oh well, I didn’t say it nearly as well as you did (but the John Gill comment I posted in #14 says some good things, I think). I too agree that this is a conscience issue, or what is also commonly referred to as ‘audiaphora’, or disputable matters.
Fred said:
when we say , whether explicitly or by implication, that we do not want to obey a command of the ten commandments, in spirit and not the letter, we are saying alot both about ourselves , and our love for God.
Fred, it sounds as if you may be living under the Mosaic Convenant instead of the Abrahamic Covenant. If you are trying to maintain that standard as the Israelites did when they responded to Moses with “All this we will do!”, then good luck with that. I hope you don’t go the route of the Israelites, though… who just a short while later were dancing and having a party around a calf of gold.
My God is a God of promise, and my salvation is found in the promise given to Abraham…I pray yours is as well.
28. Michael Garner
September 25, 2006
6:46 PM
All I can say is, if you do church and then do that mall, how are you showing truly the importance of worshipping God in your life.
I suppose I would ask where we get the notion that we cannot worship God at the mall. Personally, I hate malls and hope to never step foot in another one. However, when Paul says that we should do all things to the glory of God (even eating!), I tend to think that this would involve mall trips.
There is an unfortunate presupposition among many Evangelicals that going to church is “worshipping God” (sometimes just the Singing is considered worship!) and then after that we go on with the rest of our life. The super spiritual might even contend that we spend a day at church, a time in family worship, private devotions, prayer, and maybe a communion service on Sunday and that is our worship for the week.
I believe that corporate worship (read: going to church) is an important element of worship. However, when we begin to pit worship against other aspects of our life I really wonder if we have the same view as the biblical authors (and Jesus). Our entire life should be characterized as a life of worship and this can, should, and eventually must include our time of corporate worship, but also meals, mall trips, soccer games, etc.
In Christ alone,
mike
29. Brian Thornton
September 25, 2006
8:03 PM
Excellent points, Michael. I think you hit on the essence of what Jesus was saying to the woman at the well regarding how the time was coming and had now come where those who worship would not worship only in a particular geographic location, but would and were worshipping in spirit and in truth.
This, of course, is not to say that true worship doesn’t take place in a church, but it doesn’t ONLY take place within the walls of the church building.
Having said that, I am not advocating this lame excuse many give who regularly find other things to do besides gathering corporately, and saying they were worshipping out on the lake or in the deer stand or at the ball park while their child played in a game on Sunday morning. For in doing that, they have violated the imperative to NOT forsake the assembling of themselves together with other believers.
30. Aaron S. Wilson
September 25, 2006
11:16 PM
David Hewitt mentioned Don Whitney’s thoughts on this… Providentially, I just had the privilege of hearing him speak at our church on this very subject.
You can download the two messages here for free. If they don’t appear on the page linked above, just do a search for “Don Whitney” in the search engine provided.
31. Phil
September 26, 2006
2:17 AM
*whew* All I can say is that it amazes (and disappoints) me how many people are stuck viewing the New Testament/Convenant through they lens of the Old Testament/Convenants instead of the other way around as the Apostles did.
32. Brian Thornton
September 26, 2006
8:10 AM
Excellent point, Phil. The OT is to be interpreted in light of the NT, and not the other way around, as you stated.
Interesting site you have, by the way.
33. Rich B.
September 26, 2006
9:05 AM
Phil and Brian bring up a good point - hermeneutics. I think the Bible is the history of salvation in its historical, progressive, and organic outworking, culminating in the Lord Jesus Christ’s death and resurrection. The NT is God’s expostion of the coming of Christ and its implications for the church. The OT pointed to Christ. The NT is its fulfillment. Any one subject under consideration must be traced in its broadest historical contexts. Its progressive elements (i.e., its various redemptive-historical functions) must be taken into account. Its organic connection to both antecedent and subsequent revelation must be considered. And, of course, the nature and elements of its NT fulfillment must be determined. Take 1 Jn. 3:8b, for instance. Applying the “canonical” hermeneutic outlined above, one will have a full, rich, and whole-Bible understanding of the purpose for which the Son of God was manifested.
Concerning the Sabbath, here’s something I wrote elsewhere, slightly modified:
“Quite often when combating the doctrine of the Christian Sabbath, those against it are quick to run to Romans 14, Galatians 4, or Colossians 2 as though these texts were trump cards that overruled every other argument. This approach, however, discards the flow and progress of redemptive history concerning the Sabbath. It assumes the Sabbath has only two functions in redemptive history–as a sign between God and Old Covenant Israel and as a shadow of Christ to come. This is a myopic approach to a more complex issue with far-reaching implications for God’s people.
My aim is to examine the OT’s teaching on the Sabbath. Quite unashamedly, I will approach this study utilizing the biblical-theological or redemptive-historical approach, which seeks to examine a subject in the historical (and usually, in the canonical) order in which it is presented in Scripture. This allows us to see a doctrine’s inception, the various stages of its application and modification, and sometimes its abrogation. This method helps us to see a doctrine’s basis, to identify unique, redemptive-historical applications, and to address the question of continuity and discontinuity in the biblical materials. It gives us a panoramic view of the doctrine’s development within the Bible itself. When the doctrine of the Sabbath is approached this way, the case for a Christian Sabbath becomes not only clear but also compelling.”
I quote this to point out the importance of hermeneutical methodology, especially when dealing with a subject like the Sabbath. I do believe the OT is to be interpreted through the hermeneutical lens of the NT. But, in order to do that, we must know what the OT teaches on a given subject. For instance, in the case of the Sabbath, IMO, the OT teaches that it is grounded in creation, incorporated into Old Covenant Israel’s law (i.e., weekly and non-weekly Sabbaths), and contained in two prophetic contexts: 1. the future abrogation of Old Covenant Israel’s Sabbaths and 2. an abiding Sabbath under the New Covenant. I also think that the NT affirms this understanding of the OT in the language of fulfillment.
This is a very complex issue, so I’ll recommend a few books. :-) John Owen, volume II of his Hebrews commentary; Pipa, The Lord’s Day, and chapter 4 of Astair Begg’s Pathway to Freedom. Owen is not for beginners, but very thorough. Pipa’s book is very readable. Begg’s chapter is brief, but very much to the point.
34. damien
September 26, 2006
9:20 AM
“We believe in the ten commandments, all nine of them.”
Antinomians unite!
35. Chelsey Karns
September 26, 2006
12:35 PM
I recently read a book called “Call the Sabbath a Delight” by Walter Chantry that Tim posted an article on several months ago. Reading the book completely changed the way I look at the Sabbath in light of Scripture. Many people here seem to be screaming “Legalism!” but I have found in my experience that sometimes that accusation is a wall behind which people ignoring the truth wish to hide.
Keeping the Sabbath is one of the Ten Commandments, but it is more than that - it is a creation mandate. God rested on the seventh day, before sin ever entered the world. Did God need to rest after creating the world? No. But He rested as an example for us. Certainly the judicial and ceremonial requirements of the Sabbath are no longer required to be followed—grace did away with that. But the moral law, the Ten Commandments, is still in effect.
Some here seem to be hiding behind the phrase “The Sabbath was made for man.” If that is the case, then shouldn’t we seek to use the Sabbath for the reason for which it was made? God has given us an entire DAY of the week to spend worshipping Him and meditating on Him. He asks that we cease from our labors— what a blessing! He asks that we spend it in fellowhip at church with other believers—what a blessing! He asks that we seek to focus our thoughts and actions on Him—what a blessing! Jesus demonstrated that three types of “work” may be done on the Sabbath - works of mercy (ex: healing people), works of necessity (ex: in modern days, a doctor at a hospital) and works of piety (ex: what the priests did to get the temple ready for worship). Thus on the Sabbath God call us to do things that bless others, things that directly bless Him, and then only the things that we absolutely have to do—what a blessing!
Instead of going out to eat, why not practice hospitality and invite families over to your house? Our issues with setting apart a day for the Lord are not as well-placed as we pretend; they are the symptoms of a selfish heart. It is not easy to give things up on Sunday, or do to extra things during the week so that you are not forced to do work on Sunday. I’m 20 years old and in college, and about four years ago my youth pastor really convicted me about how I spent my Sabbaths—most of the time, it was doing homework. It has been a long and disciplined process of getting things done during the week so that I don’t have to do them on Sunday. Sometimes some work doesn’t get done because I waste time on Friday and Saturday night. But it truly is a blessing to put those things aside when I go to bed Saturday night and go to church the next morning not having to worry about all the things I have to do. I’ve done what I can. Then I can spend the morning in worship, the afternoon with extra time to read my Bible and pray or read other books about God, and head back to church Sunday night. I feel refreshed when I wake up on Monday morning for another week.
I’m not trying to puff myself up or laud my accomplishments in regards to keeping the Sabbath; I share personal experience only to show that it IS possible to see the Sabbath as a delight, and not a burden. I can’t wait for the day when I get married and have children and can use the entire day of the week in order to devote special attention to training my children up in the way that they should go.
Keeping the Sabbath does not preclude devotion to God during the week; we should be very wary of “compartmentalizing” our worship. God should be part of everything we do, and all glory should be given to Him in every activity… but truly what a blessing it is to have a day when we don’t have to try to figure out how to bless God by going to the mall. We can bless Him simply be resting in His presence and with our other believers for the entire day.
Grace and pecae…
36. Michael Garner
September 26, 2006
1:15 PM
Chelsey,
You have a very good post and I am glad that you have felt convicted about your use of Sunday and are now acting in accordance with your convictions.
However, as you noted, God rested on the Sabbath (7th day) and he instructed his people (namely the Jews) to rest on the Sabbath (7th day). However, this leaves Christians who want to observe the Sabbath in a strange position. We don’t really do anything on the seventh day (read: saturday). Rather, we worship corporately (most of us anyway) on the Lord’s Day (read: Sunday).
This is fine and seems to follow the pattern of the early church who gathered together especially on Sunday for the worship and remembering of our Resurrected Lord.
However, I sense a bit of a hermeneutical issue when we decide that we want to take a certain part of the Sabbath requirements and implement them as requirements for our observance of the Lord’s Day. Some have been quick to call Sunday the “Christian Sabbath,” but I would be quick to ask if their was biblical background for doing so. I can think of no place in the Bible where that is done.
Now, does that make it WRONG to consider one day more sacred than another? No. I do not believe so. But let me remind others of the words of the Apostle Paul:
One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.
If there are some who consider Sunday more sacred (and thus deserving of special rest, special fellowship, special service, etc.) then be fully convince in your own mind and act in accordance with that (Chelsey, again I applaud you for living out your convictions). But I think that we also need to remember the second half of the verse. Those who consider every day alike should be fully convinced in their own mind.
I think once Christians get this one concept wrapped around our head we will have far less arguments about this topic.
I suppose I will point out one last thing that might add a bit of weight to my argument. Although I have bene arguing for an “who considers all days alike” position, in practice I am much closer to the Christian Sabbath view. The way I live on Sunday’s would probably be approved by most people who have been arguing for the Christian Sabbath view. That being said, I think that it is important that we have pleanty of brothers and sisters who appropriately believe and act “that everyday is alike” and live out those practice. For those people, I think we need to stop trying to create false guilt (not suggesting that anyone here is doing that) and start realizing that God has made some things where people can disagree and both be right! Isn’t it amazing.
In Christ alone,
mike
37. Brian Thornton
September 26, 2006
2:51 PM
Micahel, good comments.
I too, though I am arguing that one’s views should not be imposed upon another with respect to this issue, would fall closer in what I do on Sundays to the side of those who are advocating rest, reflection, etc. That aside, I do still think this is addressed by Paul in the verse you quoted above, and I quoted earlier in this thread.
When we begin to look on our brother or sister with contempt regarding an issue like this, we are in sin even though we may think they are the one in sin by their action or inaction.
38. Rich B.
September 26, 2006
3:22 PM
I really appreciate the gracious tone of the posts here. I hope nothing I have said has been taken to mean I was “imposing” my view on another’s conscience. I think that’s a sin. I do beleive in liberty of conscience in things indifferent. Now the million dollar question is, “Is this issue “indifferent”?” Is it audiaphora? Does it come within the umbrella of Rom. 14? Some would say yes; others no. When it comes right down to it, the differences are exegetical first, then theological, then practical. I have noticed that quite often when discussing this issue, participants jump to the practical and then things often get emotional and unedifying. I try to stay with the exegetical as much as possible, throwing in the historical and theological from time to time. IMO, it does more for discussion board edification.
39. donsands
September 26, 2006
3:51 PM
“There remanis therefore a rest to the people of God.
For he that is entered into his rest, he also has ceased from his own works, as God did from His.” Heb. 4:9-10
“Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we amy obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need (which is every hour for me).” Heb. 4:16
40. Chris Poteet
September 26, 2006
6:27 PM
“This is a myopic approach to a more complex issue with far-reaching implications for God’s people.”
Rich - you didn’t substantiate this position thoroughly. Why is it a myopic approach?
41. Rich B.
September 26, 2006
11:58 PM
I said: “This is a myopic approach to a more complex issue with far-reaching implications for God’s people.”
Chris replied:
Rich - you didn’t substantiate this position thoroughly. Why is it a myopic approach?
Rich B. here: Great question, Chris! The statement you referred to came in the context of something I wrote elsewhere and quoted above. It is in the introduction of a larger piece. To fully answer that would take too much space here. :-) IMO, viewing the Sabbath only as a sign between Old Covenant Israel and God and as a shadow of Christ to come is too narrow and does not take into consideration all the relevent biblical data. The Sabbath predates Exodus 20 and is contained in Old Testament prophecy concerning the New Covenant. If these factors are not taken into proper consideration, one has narrowed the focus of the biblical data and the conclusion will reflect that. In other words, it is myopic. The hermeneutical lens needs to be wider to get the full picture of the Sabbath throughout redemtive history. The piece quoted above seeks to do that.
42. Chris Poteet
September 27, 2006
9:10 AM
I’m assuming this is Richard Barcellos? Thanks for the reply.
You say that the Sabbath predates Exodus 20, but you’re riding on the assumption that the Sabbath is a creation ordinance. This assumption I have yet to be convinced by. While Yahweh looks back at creation for the character of the Sabbath, the Sabbath itself as an ordinance wasn’t instituted until Sinai. Did Adam, Eve, Noah, and Abraham all participate in the Sabbath? It would seem as though they did not.
As far as the Sabbath as a typological entity. I think it’s odd that reformed covenant theologians (to which I am one) see all kinds of typology, but those who want to maintain the threefold division of the law have to separate the Sabbath as having a typological role in relation from before and after the Messiah. Canaan typified the New Heavens & New Earth, circumcision typified regeneration, and the Sabbath typified the rest we achieve in the Messiah. In the same there is a universalization of the land inheritance (Mat 5:5) so to is there a universalization of the day of rest, because it is finally accomplished (Heb 4:11).
I would also go farther to say that as the Decalogue was a summary statement of the Mosaic Covenant the Sabbath was the sign of that covenant as was the Tree of Life of the Adamic, the rainbow of the Noahic, and circumcision of the Abrahamic.
What really puzzles me is that a sign of the Abrahamic Covenant (circumcision) is strongly denied as having a theological “crossover” in terms of a sign entering the covenant community, yet they maintain the sign of the old covenant.
The big challenge is that I have yet to read a rational and convicing defense of the threefold division of the law. Being in a ARBCA 1689 LBC church hasn’t provided me much opportunity for dialogue on this issue so I appreciate the feedback.
43. Phil
September 27, 2006
11:09 AM
Brian said: “Interesting site you have, by the way.”
Sorry… there’s nothing on it right now for various reasons. I just cite the URL so my email isn’t displayed here. “Truly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the children of man, and whatever blasphemies they utter, but whoever collects email addresses for spam never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin.”
[/thread hijack]
44. Rich B.
September 27, 2006
4:02 PM
Chris said:
I’m assuming this is Richard Barcellos? Thanks for the reply.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Tis I, tis I. Greetings!
Chris:
You say that the Sabbath predates Exodus 20, but you’re riding on the assumption that the Sabbath is a creation ordinance. This assumption I have yet to be convinced by. While Yahweh looks back at creation for the character of the Sabbath, the Sabbath itself as an ordinance wasn’t instituted until Sinai.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, there is a Sabbath in Ex. 16. :-) Also, I think Ex. 20 and Mk. 2 are clear - the Sabbath is as old as man. BTW, I have written on this subject in the most recent edition of the Reformed Baptist Theological Review.
Chris said:
Did Adam, Eve, Noah, and Abraham all participate in the Sabbath? It would seem as though they did not.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Here is somehting Gordon CLark said about this: …before the time of Abraham the account is sparse on all points. For example, the law of monogamous marriage is not mentioned, though Christ referred to it as imposed at creation [Mt. 19:1-8]. Also, there is no mention of sacrifices from the time of Abel to Noah, nor from Genesis 47:1 till after the Exodus, a period of 400 years. There is no mention of the Sabbath from Joshua to I Kings …; yet this was a post-Mosaic period. …Hence, sparcity [sic], with reference to sacrifice, marriage, and the Sabbath, does not prove their non-existence. …If the Fourth Commandment was newly instituted in the desert, how can one avoid inconsistency without regarding the other nine also as new? Now, there is no mention of any law against murder in the first four chapters of Genesis. Yet Cain clearly knew that murder was forbidden. (Gordon H. Clark, Colossians (Jefferson, TN: The Trinity Foundation, re. 1989), 94-95)
IMO, silence actually proves nothing in this case. All Bible-believing Christians would argue on other grounds that murder, for instance, was a sin even before it was explicitly revealed as such. We must remember that Moses did not write the book of Genesis as an ethical handbook. He wrote it for the Jews just prior to entering the Promised Land to remind them who God is, who they were as Abraham’s physical seed, and how all of this related to God’s redemptive purpose. We should not demand out of the Genesis narrative a detailed ethical scheme. It was not written for that purpose and we run into many problems when we assume it was.
Chris said:
As far as the Sabbath as a typological entity. I think it’s odd that reformed covenant theologians (to which I am one) see all kinds of typology, but those who want to maintain the threefold division of the law have to separate the Sabbath as having a typological role in relation from before and after the Messiah. Canaan typified the New Heavens & New Earth, circumcision typified regeneration, and the Sabbath typified the rest we achieve in the Messiah. In the same there is a universalization of the land inheritance (Mat 5:5) so to is there a universalization of the day of rest, because it is finally accomplished (Heb 4:11).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I don’t think I get what your getting at. If this helps, many Covenant theologians see a multiplicity of purpose for the Sabbath - one being a type of the eternal rest Adam was offered in the Garden. Since we have not all entered that rest, since the eternal state is yet future, the Sabbath still functions as a type of glory to come. John Owen holds this view, as do others.
Chris said:
I would also go farther to say that as the Decalogue was a summary statement of the Mosaic Covenant the Sabbath was the sign of that covenant as was the Tree of Life of the Adamic, the rainbow of the Noahic, and circumcision of the Abrahamic.
What really puzzles me is that a sign of the Abrahamic Covenant (circumcision) is strongly denied as having a theological “crossover” in terms of a sign entering the covenant community, yet they maintain the sign of the old covenant.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Sabbath has more functions in redemtpive history than THE sign of the Old Covenant.
Chris said:
The big challenge is that I have yet to read a rational and convicing defense of the threefold division of the law. Being in a ARBCA 1689 LBC church hasn’t provided me much opportunity for dialogue on this issue so I appreciate the feedback.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That sounds like a thread all its own! Maybe the stuff above clears up some of the mud. :-)
45. Chelsey Karns
September 29, 2006
10:32 AM
Michael,
Thank you for your gracious response to my comment.
—————————-
As I mentioned in my post, I highly recommend the book Call the Sabbath a Delight by Walter Chantry.
One of my frustrations with some of the arguments people have against keeping the Sabbath is not so much a result of wanting to puff myself up with pride and lord myself over another because I feel like I’m more holy or righteous; rather, I become frustrated when people use as proof texts for their arguments passages that are not even dealing with the subject in question.
Keeping the Sabbath is not a Romans 14 issue. As Archibald Alexander said:
“There is a text in Paul’s epistle to the Romans, which has been supposed to teach that it is a matter of indifference whether we observe the Sabbath or not. — “One man esteemeth one day above another; another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be full persuaded in his own mind.” But evidently, the question here discussed relates to the ceremonial law. It relates not to the Sabbath; which, as we have seen, was no part of the ceremonial law, but belonged to the moral code. The ceremonial law was virtually abrogated by the death of Christ; but all Christians were not yet enlightened to understand their Christian liberty; and such were indulged in their continued observance of these rites. The apostle is treating here of meats and drinks and festival days, the binding obligation of which had ceased.
But in the epistle to the Colossians, Paul says, “Let no man, therefore, judge you, in meat or drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new moon, or the Sabbath days.” Here, again, the ceremonial law is obviously the subject of discourse. He is speaking of “meats,” “drinks,” “new moons,” and “Sabbath days.” And the word Sabbath relates to the numerous Sabbaths of the ceremonial law, distinct from the weekly Sabbath. Whenever a festival of the law continued eight days, the first and the last were always kept as Sabbaths. Or the reference might be to the sabbatical year, for the word days is not in the original.”
Romans 14 is not about the moral law. If it were, then we could assume that Paul could just as easil y have added another paragraph like “Murder whom you will, for one man esteems one life above another; one sees every man’s life as the same.” The Sabbath is not an issue of conscience, and no where in the New Testament is it treated as such.
As far as how to keep the Sabbath, perhaps THAT is more an issue of conscience—not necessarily that it must be kept. For to “keep” the Sabbath is to believe that it should be a day set apart. Where there are no regulations or requirements, we should seek the Lord. Perhaps your afternoon on the Sabbath should be spent teaching your children the catechism. Perhaps it should be spent in prayer for those near to you who are perishing. But regardless of how you “keep” it, the fact remains that God intended for it to be kept. What matters more than our actions are our hearts—if we are desiring in our heart to sanctify the Lord’s Day and set it apart, then hopefully our actions will be in line with that desire. Where we fail or make wrong decisions, there is grace through Christ, but we should not use our liberty as an excuse for sin.
This issue is close to my heart. One of the most significant parts of Walter Chantry’s book that I mentioned is not so much each individual argument against not keeping the Sabbath. Rather, it is what he sees as the result of churches today NOT keeping the Sabbath. He sees a direct relationship between the state of our churches and families and us not keeping the Sabbath. His justification for this argument comes from the fact that, were we to spend each Sunday purposefully focusing on the Lord and teaching His Word to or children, there would be a huge impact on our lives and our culture. As a student at a large, secular, state university, I cannot help but wonder how my campus would be different if those who claim Jesus had grown up in homes and churches where the Sabbath was kept. What an excellent witness that would be—of diligent workers who do their best in their classes Monday-Saturday so that Sunday they don’t have to do work; of committed worshippers who see the Lord’s Day as different from every other day when they are submerged in the secular culture of their school; of sanctified proclaimers of the blessed name of the Lord who value Him higher than anything else, even their own labor and pursuits. 52 days of the week could be devoted solely to things of the Lord. By the time you get to where I am, that means over 1000 days devoted to the Lord. What a difference that would make!
Do we really shrink so much at setting apart a day for the Lord, a day that He has commanded? Jesus did away with the ceremonial law, because those laws were given to keep the Jews from becoming like their pagan neighbors. Once Jesus came, they were no longer needed. But why would we think that Jesus would do away with a day to worship God, a day that we need because of the wretched states of our souls? It doesn’t make any sense. If anything, the Incarnation should have been even more of a reason to keep the Sabbath. Who is this Jesus, and how can we know Him better? Perhaps by setting aside 1/7 of our week and spending it in diligent pursuit of communion with Him.
Grace and peace to you all in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.