# Sunday as the Christian Sabbath?



## Nilloc (Sep 6, 2010)

Could someone please explain what Scriptural proof there is for the Sabbath being changed from the seventh day of the week to the first? As I mention on my profile page the only problem I have with the 1689 LBC (I believe the WCF says almost the same thing) is its stance on Sunday Sabbatarianism. I agree that Sunday, the Lord’s Day, is the Christian’s day of worship (Acts 20:7, 1 Cor. 16:1-2), but I’m not comfortable calling it the Christian Sabbath yet.

I’d appreciate any help and look forward to your answers.


----------



## paculina (Sep 6, 2010)

Acts 20:7. 

Besides, there's good theological reason for meeting on the first day of the week and not the last. Jesus ascended on the first day of the week. And as Christians, God gives us our rest BEFORE we work, not after. 

I would tend to agree with you on calling it the Sabbath though.


----------



## rbcbob (Sep 6, 2010)

See here:

JC Ryle on the Lord's Day


----------



## Scott1 (Sep 6, 2010)

> Westminster Confession of Faith
> 
> Chapter XXI
> Of Religious Worship, and the Sabbath Day
> ...





> Scripture Proofs
> 
> ....
> 
> ...



GI Williamson, _The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes_, has a readable, thorough explanation.


----------



## Nilloc (Sep 7, 2010)

Thanks for the resources.



Joshua said:


> The Lord's Day can rightly be called "The Christian Sabbath" because it is a corollary of the 4th Commandment under the New Testament administration of the Covenant of Grace. If one wishes to distance "The Lord's Day" from the _sabbath_, then one may not consistently refer to the 4th Commandment for a measure of keeping the Lord's Day holy. And if one does that, then one may as well say that there are only Nine Commandments to be kept now, which really makes no sense, since there were _10_ codified in stone to indicate their perpetuity as God's Moral Law and the code by which we are to behave ourselves. It can rightly be called the Christian Sabbath because it is but a continuation of keeping one day in seven holy unto the Lord, as is commanded in the 4th Commandment.



Okay, that's a good point. But how would you respond to those who would say the Saturday Sabbath is binding under the fourth commandment, but that we are also to worship on the first day as a celebration of the Resurrection and not as the Sabbath? I've heard people say similar things, and that some scholars think that early Christians worshiped on both days in the first century.

That leads to another question that has just come to mind. Luke refers to the Sabbath about ten times in the Book of Acts, and I've never heard anyone think they're refering to anything other than Saturday. If this is the case, how can we call Sunday the Sabbath when Luke still calls Saturday the Sabbath? Would you say the Lord's Day functions as the Sabbath, but the title is still retained for Saturday?


----------



## TimV (Sep 7, 2010)

Joshua said:


> If one wishes to distance "The Lord's Day" from the sabbath, then one may not consistently refer to the 4th Commandment for a measure of keeping the Lord's Day holy.



Josh nails it.

---------- Post added at 09:38 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:36 PM ----------




Nilloc said:


> But how would you respond to those who would say the Saturday Sabbath is binding under the fourth commandment, but that we are also to worship on the first day as a celebration of the Resurrection and not as the Sabbath?



Tell them they are antinomian nut jobs, only worse, since in a twisted way they make the commandment to work 6 days into 5 days


----------



## littlepeople (Sep 7, 2010)

Nilloc said:


> Saturday Sabbath is binding under the fourth commandment, but that we are also to worship on the first day



"Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work"

The command to labor 6 days is as sure as the command to rest 1. This creates problems for the Saturday (sabbath) and Sunday (corporate worship) proposal. You can't exactly draw a straight line, but it would be hard for the Jerusalem church to gather if they were working all day Sunday.

---------- Post added at 11:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:38 PM ----------

TimV beat me to it


----------



## BobVigneault (Sep 7, 2010)

You really need to change your original question to say "can someone give a scriptural DEMONSTRATION for changing the Sabbath to the Lord's Day?" I think Josh gave a great demonstration. There simply is no proof, no explicit argument from Scripture that changes the day. I go to church with Sunday-keepers so I guess practically, I'm a 'one in seven' observer though my leaning is toward the clear teaching that we are to keep holy the day which the Lord ordained as the Sabbath at creation. I've never been able to follow the reasoning that makes the change; I see too many gaps. Unless I can see an explicit command from Christ or an apostle, I remain an antinomian nut job. {Sigh}


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Sep 7, 2010)

I think the key to understanding the change of day, is first to understand what the purpose of the Sabbath is. Understand _why_ God instituted the Sabbath, and to me, the issue of day-change is obvious.

God gives himself to man in the Sabbath. That's why it it is said to be "made for man, not man for the Sabbath." The Sabbath is rest, for we find our rest in him. And there is no better occasion for finding that rest than in worship. The Sabbath has always been for worship, preeminently.

God calls us to meet with him. He _summons_ us. We come when he calls. He sets the agenda. He sets the date.

Jesus is God. In and after the resurrection, when do we read of him choosing to meet with his people? Repeatedly, he comes to them (or rather they are brought to him, cf. Gal.4:9) on the first day. To begin with, they are meeting practically 'round-the-clock. But when does he specially make his presence known?

Week by week, on the first day. He's signaling the day he's chosen, he who is the "Lord of the Sabbath," the one day he's plainly stated is his--that is, the Lord's day.

The other NT references to the first day of the week gathering for Word and sacrament, and "the collection," etc., indicate that the disciples got the message.


----------



## Marrow Man (Sep 7, 2010)

One more thing I would add to above discussion: Pentecost was also on the first day of the week.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Sep 7, 2010)

Here is a useful table of Christ's appearances with some commentary; from an article here.
View attachment 1911


----------



## py3ak (Sep 7, 2010)

From Josh:

This post has been left here as a reminder of what the thread should not become. Heed the Bat's wise words and it shall be well with you. Heed them not and beware the venom of the Bat.

{The preceding note has been allowed to stand because it contains suitably flattering references.}​


puritanpilgrim said:


> ...and then a moderator reminds everyone this is a confessional board...


 
[Moderator]Thank you for the testament to our consistency!

Let me remind everyone, that this is a confessional board. The confessional view is that the Lord's Day is appropriately called the Christian Sabbath. If you would like to learn why, my two favorite sources are Dabney and James Durham. If you don't want to learn why, you don't have to; but you do have to refrain from arguing against the Confessional view.[/Moderator]


----------



## Nilloc (Sep 7, 2010)

If I did something wrong in starting this thread, then I do apologize. I didn't want to argue againist the confessional view, I just had some questions and wanted some clarification.

The only question I have left in regards to this was what I said in post #6



> Luke refers to the Sabbath about ten times in the Book of Acts, and I've never heard anyone think they're refering to anything other than Saturday. If this is the case, how can we call Sunday the Sabbath when Luke still calls Saturday the Sabbath? Would you say the Lord's Day functions as the Sabbath, but the title is still retained for Saturday?


----------



## Herald (Sep 7, 2010)

Nilloc said:


> If I did something wrong in starting this thread, then I do apologize. I didn't want to argue againist the confessional view, I just had some questions and wanted some clarification.



Collin, you did nothing wrong. Honest questioning is welcome on the PB. Those who ask questions with a mind to learn bring much value to this board. I'm glad that you're here.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Sep 7, 2010)

Re Calvin. While not a Puritan (to use an anachronism) Calvin has been demonstrated to at least fall into the category of a "practical Sabbatarian" (cf. works by Primus, Dennison, and Gaffin) and more recently one author has sought to show even his theory is not as far as it is normally asserted to be from Sabbatarian theory (cf. Stewart E. Lauer, "John Calvin, the Nascent Sabbatarian: A Reconsideration of Calvin’s View of Two Key Sabbath-Issues," _The Confessional Presbyterian _journal 3 (2007).


----------



## rbcbob (Sep 7, 2010)

Nilloc said:


> If I did something wrong in starting this thread, then I do apologize. I didn't want to argue againist the confessional view, I just had some questions and wanted some clarification.
> 
> The only question I have left in regards to this was what I said in post #6
> 
> Luke refers to the Sabbath about ten times in the Book of Acts, and I've never heard anyone think they're refering to anything other than Saturday. If this is the case, how can we call Sunday the Sabbath when Luke still calls Saturday the Sabbath? Would you say the Lord's Day functions as the Sabbath, but the title is still retained for Saturday?



Among other considerations, Luke wrote before John penned:

*I was in the Spirit on the Lord's Day, ἐν τη κυριακη ἡμερα (Rev. 1:10)*


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Sep 7, 2010)

Just to address the abrogation of the Sabbath issue and the non abrogation issue of the Sabbath from a Reformed Baptist position. 

The quote is taken from off my blog and other posts.

http://www.puritanboard.com/blogs/puritancovenanter/some-reformed-baptists-sabbath-concerning-colossians-hebrews-444/



> *1. The Old Testament prophesies the abrogation and cessation of the Sabbath under the New Covenant.
> *
> 
> The OT clearly prophesies the abrogation and cessation of ancient Israel‘s Sabbaths. It does so in Hos. 2:11, which says, ―I will also cause all her mirth to cease, her feast days, her New Moons, her Sabbaths--all her appointed feasts." We will make several observations that bear this out. First, Hosea‘s prophecy is dealing with the days of the New Covenant. The phrase ―in that day" (vv. 16, 18, 21) is used prophetically of New Covenant days in Is. 22:20. Revelation 3:7 quotes Is. 22:22 and applies it to Christ. The prophecy in Is. 22:20 mentions the Lord‘s servant, who is Christ. Isaiah 22:20-22 says:
> ...



There is a bit more in the blog but this addresses a few issues mentioned here.


----------



## rbcbob (Sep 7, 2010)

> The cases, indeed, of sacrifice and of the Sabbath are in one respect similar. The record is not complete: but we infer what is wanting from what is expressly stated. Of sacrifice, the celebration by the patriarchs after the deluge is perpetually recorded, though we have no direct account of its institution. Of the Sabbath, the original law is distinctly given, though the continued observance by the patriarchs is not expressly mentioned. … The very first act of divine worship after the fall affords some indication of a day of religion. Cain and Abel brought their offerings “*in process of time*” as the common reading has it, but literally, and as it is in the margin, “*at the end of the day*s.”



The Lord’s Day, by Daniel Wilson


----------



## louis_jp (Sep 7, 2010)

Surely Hosea 2:11 is talking about the judgment side of "that day." There will be no sabbath for the wicked, whose gaity, etc. will be destroyed. If anything that affirms that the opposite will be the case for God's people. "For my salvation is about to come... how blessed is the man... who keeps from profaning the sabbath... to them I will give within my house and within my walls... an everlasting name...." etc. (Is. 56).


----------



## TimV (Sep 7, 2010)

BobVigneault said:


> I remain an antinomian nut job



Bob, you misread me. I called nut jobs those who 



TimV said:


> But how would you respond to those who would say the Saturday Sabbath is binding under the fourth commandment, but that we are also to worship on the first day as a celebration of the Resurrection and not as the Sabbath?



claim we need to keep the Sabbath on Saturday and go to church on Sunday as well. I've been informed that there are several people here who believe this. Seriously?


----------



## py3ak (Sep 8, 2010)

I just read this today:

"But as baptism in the Spirit is Christ's circumcision, so the Lord's day is His Sabbath; and to be in the Spirit on that day, worshipping and serving Him in the truth of His Gospel, is to take up the yoke of the fourth commandment." - Patrick Fairbairn

The whole discussion of the Sabbath in his _Typology of Scripture_ is quite worth consulting.


----------



## Peairtach (Sep 8, 2010)

The Fourth Commandment isn't the only Commandment to be adjusted for non-moral, positive, aspects. See the Fifth Commandment. The promise associated with this Commandment is adjusted for the greatly expanded Land of Promise, which now encompasses not only Israel but the whole Earth, by the Apostle Paul in Ephesians 6:3

_Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise; ) That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth. (Ephesians 6:1-3, KJV)_

Also the whole of the Ten Commandments have been adjusted for their ceremonial aspect has passed away. They are no longer written on stone and stored in the Ark of the Covenant. 

_But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth. For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious. (II Cor 3:7-11, KJV)_

The contention that the Weekly Sabbath was only made for the Jews is rubbish. Our Lord explicitly says it was made for Man. Notice also how throughout the Gospels our Lord clears the Weekly sabbath of erroneous Pharasaical additions but little or no attention is paid to the other Jewish Holy Days. 

Not that there is nothing that we can learn from those days, but in contradistinction to the Weekly Sabbath they are of the Old Covenant mediated through Moses.

The Day was changed from the Last to the First Day of the Week, because the Last Day of the Week was the first day of the completed Old Creation, and the first day on which the Children of Israel were finally redeemed from the hand of Pharaoh. 

The First Day of the Week is the first day of the New Creation and the Redemption that Christ has achieved for His people from sin and Satan.

These latter works by God in Christ are far greater than the Old Creation work and the redemption from Egypt by Moses. Hence the Apostles under a word or revelation from Christ changed the Day.

The New Creation has commenced and we look forward towards its completion. Hence we enter and enjoy Christ's Rest from the work of the New Creation with Him on the First Day of the Week, rather than entering and enjoying God's Rest from the work of the Old Creation with Him on the Last Day of the Week.

Do we love this present (evil) world too much when we can't enjoy Christ's command and invitation to Rest from it with Him for one day a week on our way to our permanent Rest with Him?


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Sep 8, 2010)

Beside the articles mentioned above, re. Calvin on the 4th Commandment, I recommend reading his most mature thought on the topic, being his sermons on the Decalog, from Deuteronomy 5. You can fairly easily find a paperback edition, trans. by Benjamin Farley. Banner of Truth once republished a hardback photolith. copy of the folio of the entire Deuteronomy sermon series (replete with all that anachronistic spelling). The Farley edition is much more accessible.

I quote from it here:
http://www.puritanboard.com/f18/calvins-view-sabbath-35725/#post444413


----------

