Sabbath breaking occupations

[steadfast7]

Is it ok to be employed in a job that requires you to work on Sundays? What is the criteria for saying yes/no?
Here's a list off the top of my head:

- soldiers
- on-call professions: doctors, nurses, vets.
- security guards, police, firefighters, EMS, dispatchers etc.

I think the argument would be that these are "necessary" occupations, but what about a guy who needs to feed his family with the first available job he can find?

 

[BertMulder]

the Synod of Dordt defined necessary sunday work as works of mercy, and those of 'present necessity'. For someone to work on sunday to feed his family, he should consider his trust in the Lord's providential care, and also that the care through the diaconate is, in the sense of God's providential care, equal to earning your bread in the sweat of your face.

 

[Pilgrim]

There's anything wrong with any of the above professions. It's not Sabbath breaking to perform works of necessity and mercy. But I think those entering those professions who have convictions about the Lord's Day should count the cost beforehand. It's not a sin, but some may not want to have to make that kind of trade-off when it comes to regularly missing out on the means of grace, even if they are performing much needed acts of mercy and necessity. It may limit what ministry one can be involved in and can limit fellowship with the brethren. Some get into medicine and related professions because there's often a lot of money to be made. Others see it as a profession to which they are called.

A few years ago I belonged to a Presbyterian congregation in which one of the ruling elders is a doctor who had a lot of responsibility at a local hospital. I can't recall exactly what his position was, but he may have been the chief of staff. It wasn't uncommon for him to have to leave in the middle of worship, sometimes to return a call and others to have to leave altogether. Other times, he wasn't able to attend at all. As I recall it, there was one stretch in which he wasn't able to attend for several weeks. He is a spiritually minded man who evidently applied himself in studying the Word and other substantial theological works and could have taught a lot more if he had the time. Another elder in that congregation is also a doctor, but he is in private practice and seldom if ever had to be away.

The kind of jobs you seem to be asking about would include retail, working in a restaurant or some other work that cannot reasonably be said to be related to mercy or necessity.

Some will say that a man should take a job if he needs to and be looking for one that allows him to be off Sundays. (I've heard elders who strongly emphasize Sabbath observance say this is permissible if it is absolutely necessary.) Others will say it shouldn't be done (if it isn't the kind of profession you listed) and that the church should support the family until he can find a job that doesn't require work on the Lord's Day.

To add another wrinkle, I've been in a situation before in which a retail store had been closed on Sun. for a decade or more, ever since it opened its doors. But the owners decided to open on the Lord's Day right after I began working there, even though it had been strongly emphasized in the interview just a week or two before that they were closed on the Lord's Day.

 

[steadfast7]

I find it difficult to define "necessity." Most of us think of the immediate necessity of life-threatening injury or the spiritual work of a pastor. But consider the down and out person struggling to find work in this declining economy. Sometimes a security guard post is the best he can get. I think it's spiritualizing to insist that he simply "trust God to provide."

By the way does anyone on the PB go out for lunch after Sunday service? Isn't this causing restaurant staff to work on Sundays?

 

[Pergamum]

If your beast of burden falls into a ditch on a Sunday, you can pull it out.

If your kids have no bread and are in danger of starvation or severity, this seems more dire than a donkey or ox in a ditch. Praise God for the provision of work. And then, when the severity passes, look for a better job.

Dennis, when I am travelling great distances on Sunday, I often feel it is "necessary" to buy gas, lodging and food and my conscience is not troubled. If I can help it, however, it is good to travel on another day.

 

[steadfast7]

So he keeps looking until he finds something. He confers with his elders and tells them his situation. He uses lawful means to gain sustenance. We never do evil (i.e. break the sabbath) so that good may come.

Would the Lord judge him if he employed wisdom, considered his options, used ordinary means of reason and counsel, and then decided to care for his family by taking the job?

What about our fellow military personnel? They are taking jobs knowing that there will be many occasions that their services are required on a Sunday. Is there something impious about signing up with this knowledge in hand?

 

[Pergamum]

Jesus and his disciples picked grain on the Sabbath. If they were really diligent in safeguarding the Sabbath, why didn't they just fast altogether and totally do without food until the end of the Sabbath? After all, Jesus did fast much longer than merely one day prior to this point.

Also, I am both a nurse and was also in the military. It seemed to me that both professions were highly honorable and needful and I would count it pretty silly if someone, in the name of being punctilious in the keeping of the letter of the law, would criticize such vocational choices.

 

[Pergamum]

Joshua,

Don't worry brother, you are not my target.

I just want to make sure any definition of "necessity" is not so lax as to allow one to define it as "anything that causes a minor inconvenience" nor so strict that one must always define "necessity" as "extreme severity or life-threatening hardship."

I know many Third World Christians who work on Sundays due to extreme poverty and I do not fault them at all, for not working means little or no food on the table.

 

[steadfast7]

Also, life in many muslim countries means working on Sunday, as it's just another working day of the week. Josh, you're right, the scenarios are many and should be death with case by case, but the situations are not so simple such that only the immediate necessities are included. There are necessities that run over the course of many months and years. Employment to feed your family is certainly one of them.

 

[Scott1]

This topic has been thoroughly discussed on previous threads. You may find helpful an advanced search (upper right) of previous discussions.

http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/keeping-sabbath-going-restaurants-16813/

One example of "necessity" is that the work itself is necessary to be done at that time. It's not about the convenience of the one who would do the work.

Examples: A doctor who must operate on a patient that day or the patient might die- that is necessity in terms of work on the sabbath.

A sales clerk who must work on Sunday or he will be demoted is an example of convenience. The work itself is not necessary on that day.

But remember, Dennis, one does not prove a rule by concentrating on finding exceptions.

God commands all His creatures to cease from their ordinary labors and recreations (sabbath) and to prioritize His worship, all day, one day in seven until the end of this world.

Few things will reflect your commitment to obeying God, your own sin, and the delight of God's favor in obedience as the sabbath/Lord's Day because it is so visible, and constant.

 

[steadfast7]

I think we need to understand our privileged economic position when answering this question. While it may be inconvenient for most of us to struggle finding a decent job, or losing one's job, for many others (the majority of people in the world), it is much more than inconvenience, it is utter despair. Coming out of India and now into Malaysia, I realize how privileged the average Malaysian is compared to Indian, where I used to think Malaysians as underprivileged when I lived in Canada.

For many people, if they do not find some kind of work, they will starve. Simple demotion is hardly an option in the developing world. Therefore, I could argue that finding and maintaining a job, any job, is a necessity for most people in the world.

 

[Pergamum]

You are in Malaysia now?

 

[Pergamum]

Joshua,

I think you over-spoke in your last post.

You seem to charge some with disparaging God's law to avoid inconvenience, whereas I believe that you do not fully grasp that many in Dennis' context are in a very poor state. We are not talking of "convenience" here, but of health and necessity. I have never gone 24 hours without a meal and it is easy to charge, or appear to charge, God's saints with a lax attitude towards his law while we sit full and comfortable.

But I would propose that if we are not careful, we could do the same with Jesus and his disciples who, not wanting to experience a little bit of trifling hunger, picked some grains from a field in order to assuage their hunger when, if they were really devout, they could have inconvenienced themselves by choosing to fast rather than even give the appearance of working on the Sabbath. After all, it is better to suffer the greatest affliction rather than commit the least of sins and the Scripture tells us to abstain from all appearance of evil.

I believe that, due to Jesus' example, our definition of "necessity" versus mere "convenience" ought to allow a little more leeway than many will allow.

 

[steadfast7]

You are in Malaysia now?

Yup, 6 month visa in India is up. Dalam Malaysia sekarang..

 

[Solparvus]

Spurgeon and Sunday employees

Dr. Peter Masters is full sabbatarian, though as for Sunday employees in the strain of necessity, he comments this on the history of the Metropolitan--and I have to say, it moves me because it was in part Spurgeon's straightforwardness on the issue of the Sabbath that persuaded me to embrace it:

In Spurgeon’s day many members of his congregation worked as servants in large Victorian households, and could worship only at one service each week and often less frequently. To leave their work would have left them without references to other employers (a necessity in those days) and destitute. Many of the 600 young women in Mrs Bartlett’s famous Bible Class were maids who could attend only once in every two or three weeks. Today we know of men who are working long shifts in security jobs, and we know how much they would love to be free throughout the Lord's Day, but cannot be. The churches of Jesus Christ support rather than alienate those whose faith must be lived out in difficult circumstances.

Once in a while a person in normal weekday employment is required to work on Sunday, such as for annual stock taking or audit preparation, and there is no way out. We understand that, especially if that person would be fired if not at work.

Remember the Lord's Day - Is there a

 

[satz]

This topic has been thoroughly discussed on previous threads. You may find helpful an advanced search (upper right) of previous discussions.

http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/keeping-sabbath-going-restaurants-16813/

One example of "necessity" is that the work itself is necessary to be done at that time. It's not about the convenience of the one who would do the work.

Examples: A doctor who must operate on a patient that day or the patient might die- that is necessity in terms of work on the sabbath.

A sales clerk who must work on Sunday or he will be demoted is an example of convenience. The work itself is not necessary on that day.

Scott,

How do you get this definition of necessity from the bible?

As Pergamum noted in his post, Jesus' disciples picked grain on the Sabbath just because they were hungry (Matt 12:1). There was no issue of anyone being in danger, and the disciples could surely have simply endured their hunger or waited until they reached a place with prepared food.

If the disciples could pick grain on the Sabbath just because they were hungry, why can't a person work on the Sabbath (assuming its not every Sunday) in order to keep his job (regardless or what type of job it is)?

 

[SolaScriptura]

I deny that what Jesus and His disciples did was sabbath-breaking. In fact, it's clear that it was a work of necessity/mercy.

You're right, Jesus and His disciples no more broke the Law than did David (who Jesus refered to as a precedent to underscore his critics' hypocrisy). And again, you're right that it was a work of necessity/mercy.

But I think you're wrong in saying that the comparison doesn't stand.

The Pharisees thought it wasn't necessary. Yet Jesus deemed that it was.
Jesus' disciples doing the work of picking some grain to eat could be construed (by some) as a violation of the 4th commandment. Yet it wasn't. Even though there is absolutely no indication that their lives were not in danger from starvation. Pergy is right in that according to one train of thought these men could have merely fasted the day rather than pick grain on the Sabbath. I think the point is that this biblical example indicates that the bar of acceptability for something to be deemed "necessary" should be lower than "immediate and direct threat to life or limb."

 

[steadfast7]

Dr. Peter Masters is full sabbatarian, though as for Sunday employees in the strain of necessity, he comments this on the history of the Metropolitan--and I have to say, it moves me because it was in part Spurgeon's straightforwardness on the issue of the Sabbath that persuaded me to embrace it:

In Spurgeon’s day many members of his congregation worked as servants in large Victorian households, and could worship only at one service each week and often less frequently. To leave their work would have left them without references to other employers (a necessity in those days) and destitute. Many of the 600 young women in Mrs Bartlett’s famous Bible Class were maids who could attend only once in every two or three weeks. Today we know of men who are working long shifts in security jobs, and we know how much they would love to be free throughout the Lord's Day, but cannot be. The churches of Jesus Christ support rather than alienate those whose faith must be lived out in difficult circumstances.

Once in a while a person in normal weekday employment is required to work on Sunday, such as for annual stock taking or audit preparation, and there is no way out. We understand that, especially if that person would be fired if not at work.

Remember the Lord's Day - Is there a

Thanks Harley. Help me to further understand: as a result of this sympathetic view of those who have to work on Sundays, you embrace the Sabbatarian position?

 

[Solparvus]

Dr. Peter Masters is full sabbatarian, though as for Sunday employees in the strain of necessity, he comments this on the history of the Metropolitan--and I have to say, it moves me because it was in part Spurgeon's straightforwardness on the issue of the Sabbath that persuaded me to embrace it:

In Spurgeon’s day many members of his congregation worked as servants in large Victorian households, and could worship only at one service each week and often less frequently. To leave their work would have left them without references to other employers (a necessity in those days) and destitute. Many of the 600 young women in Mrs Bartlett’s famous Bible Class were maids who could attend only once in every two or three weeks. Today we know of men who are working long shifts in security jobs, and we know how much they would love to be free throughout the Lord's Day, but cannot be. The churches of Jesus Christ support rather than alienate those whose faith must be lived out in difficult circumstances.

Once in a while a person in normal weekday employment is required to work on Sunday, such as for annual stock taking or audit preparation, and there is no way out. We understand that, especially if that person would be fired if not at work.

Remember the Lord's Day - Is there a

Thanks Harley. Help me to further understand: as a result of this sympathetic view of those who have to work on Sundays, you embrace the Sabbatarian position?

I'd be lying if I thought I was a great light to consult on the matter, as I haven't been a Christian very long and still haven't worked out all the issues for myself, which is why for this I deferred to Masters and Spurgeon (who is perhaps one of my top three favorites), though what I meant by straightforwardness was Spurgeon's uncompromising position on the issue--no work, no needless recreation, still in effect today as it was in creation. Perhaps it struck me at the time, "How could such a godly man be such a judaizer [hint of irony]?" I hadn't heard this at the time, the quote I gave in my post. I stumbled on this perhaps six months ago, and I embraced sabbatarianism over a year ago.

Though at the bottom line in this post, Spurgeon obviously saw those things as being an element of necessity, and Dr. Masters seems to hold the same, though knowing Spurgeon, and reading the rest of the article by Dr. Masters, neither would think it excusable if it were an element of necessity.

If anyone is interested in a good Sabbatarian case study on liberty of conscience vs. necessity, try "The Case of Mr. Robertson" from the Sword and the Trowel.

 

[Matthew Tringali]

I have thought a lot about this topic over the years and have admittedly waffled back and forth between a fairly strict Sabbatarian and somewhat more loose (although probably strict by most Xn standards) Sabbatarian.

A few points... As for me and my house we personally remain fairly strict in what we allow ourselves to do. I am in a profession where nearly all of my counter-parts work on Sundays, but I do not and make that clear to all of my clients. To date, I think I have only ever lost one client because of that fact, all others are very understanding. In our household we do not do chores on Sunday. We make sure the dishes are clean, laundry is done and house cleaned on Saturday so we can enjoy our Sabbath. Our kids are just now entering the extra-curricular activity age, but we won't be doing sporting events on Sundays. All of that much is easy for me.

Where it becomes more difficult is in other actions I choose to take that may cause more people to work on the Sabbath. The most obvious and direct one is eating out. At a certain point in the past I was very convicted to not eat out on the Sabbath for obvious reasons already hashed out well on the PB. However, why stop there? My rationale went something like this...

Is it ALWAYS breaking the Sabbath to eat out on the Sabbath? What if I am travelling on a Sunday, by necessity, and am in need of food that could not have been planned ahead of time. This is by no means a far stretch to imagine this happening on a very regular basis. A more significant example might be what if I am travelling on a Sunday and am in need of gasoline? Is fuel for my car so much different than fuel for my body? Can I not pull a trailer with extra gallons of gasoline in tow to fill up when I need it, if travelling on a Sunday, so as to keep the as station attendant from working on the Sabbath? Would anyone propose such a thing? Certainly lodging should be open, right? I began to group at least these things together in my mind, food, lodging and gasoline. But, then my mind wandered farther from there... What about television programming, newspapers, radio, etc...? Would any of these at least in part fall under the necessity or mercy provisions? I began to realize something very quickly... This train of thought only leads to one place: Pharisaical thought. Is this not precisely the problem with strict Jewish observance of the Sabbath, even to the extent of not driving, disconnecting power from the house, etc, etc... Clearly they are the most and only true consistent example of strict Sabbatarian observance. They put all good Presbyterians to shame!!! So, at this point, I concluded that, without question, lest I become a Jew, I am making judgment calls on every single small action I take on the Sabbath. (Of course, this doesn't even get into the question of whether or not the Sabbath is sundown to sundown or midnight to midnight.) So, once I realize we are all making subjective judgment calls, I decided to give myself more freedom.

I do go out to eat from time to time, although rare. I fully embrace the paradox. And yet, I think we all make paradoxical judgment calls on the Sabbath every single Sunday, lest you become a strict Jew. I am certainly open to being convinced otherwise though.

---------- Post added at 01:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:19 PM ----------

Also, where do the strict Sabbatarians draw the line with sports. Obviously you can't watch or even be a fan of the NFL or fantasy football, etc... And not watch any other sporting events on Sundays (golf, tennis, basketball - college or pro, NASCAR, etc...)... But, can you even be a fan of or support a sport or team that plays on Sundays even if you choose to not watch or attend the particular games played on Sundays? And, same question for the restaurants, I suppose. Is not eating on Sunday sufficient protest enough for their sin? Or would you ever choose to not support a business that employs people to work on Sundays ever, even if your specific solicitation is coming on a day other than Sunday? What if it is more complicated that a direct day upon which you make contact with the business. What if you buy something that you know was produced or delivered at least in part on a Sunday, even if you only purchased the product on another day of the week?

 

[Scott1]

This topic has been thoroughly discussed on previous threads. You may find helpful an advanced search (upper right) of previous discussions.

http://www.puritanboard.com/f54/keeping-sabbath-going-restaurants-16813/

One example of "necessity" is that the work itself is necessary to be done at that time. It's not about the convenience of the one who would do the work.

Examples: A doctor who must operate on a patient that day or the patient might die- that is necessity in terms of work on the sabbath.

A sales clerk who must work on Sunday or he will be demoted is an example of convenience. The work itself is not necessary on that day.

Scott,

How do you get this definition of necessity from the bible?

As Pergamum noted in his post, Jesus' disciples picked grain on the Sabbath just because they were hungry (Matt 12:1). There was no issue of anyone being in danger, and the disciples could surely have simply endured their hunger or waited until they reached a place with prepared food.

If the disciples could pick grain on the Sabbath just because they were hungry, why can't a person work on the Sabbath (assuming its not every Sunday) in order to keep his job (regardless or what type of job it is)?

We are not commanded to fast all day, every sabbath.

We are commanded explicitly, implicitly, and by creation ordinance to cease (sabbath) from our ordinary labor. Remember, the command is to work six days, sabbath one, making it "holy" by prioritizing the worship of God, all day, in a way that is not ordinarily possible the other six days.

Exodus 20

8 “Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns. 11 For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

---------- Post added at 02:35 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:26 PM ----------

Is it ALWAYS breaking the Sabbath to eat out on the Sabbath? What if I am travelling on a Sunday, by necessity, and am in need of food that could not have been planned ahead of time. This is by no means a far stretch to imagine this happening on a very regular basis. A more significant example might be what if I am travelling on a Sunday and am in need of gasoline? Is fuel for my car so much different than fuel for my body? Can I not pull a trailer with extra gallons of gasoline in tow to fill up when I need it, if travelling on a Sunday, so as to keep the as station attendant from working on the Sabbath? Would anyone propose such a thing? Certainly lodging should be open, right? I began to group at least these things together in my mind, food, lodging and gasoline. But, then my mind wandered farther from there... What about television programming, newspapers, radio, etc...? Would any of these at least in part fall under the necessity or mercy provisions? I began to realize something very quickly... This train of thought only leads to one place: Pharisaical thought. Is this not precisely the problem with strict Jewish observance of the Sabbath, even to the extent of not driving, disconnecting power from the house, etc, etc... Clearly they are the most and only true consistent example of strict Sabbatarian observance. They put all good Presbyterians to shame!!! So, at this point, I concluded that, without question, lest I become a Jew, I am making judgment calls on every single small action I take on the Sabbath. (Of course, this doesn't even get into the question of whether or not the Sabbath is sundown to sundown or midnight to midnight.) So, once I realize we are all making subjective judgment calls, I decided to give myself more freedom.

All good questions, Matthew.

There have been thoroughgoing discussions of some of these points of earlier threads (see link in earlier post).


Basically, the summary of the doctrine of Scripture:

Westminster Confession of Faith

Chapter XXI
Of Religious Worship, and the Sabbath Day


VII. As it is the law of nature, that, in general, a due proportion of time be set apart for the worship of God; so, in His Word, by a positive, moral, and perpetual commandment binding all men in all ages, He has particularly appointed one day in seven, for a Sabbath, to be kept holy unto him:[34] 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,[35] which, in Scripture, is called the Lord's Day,[36] and is to be continued to the end of the world, as the Christian Sabbath.[37]

VIII. This Sabbath is to be kept holy unto the Lord when men, after a due preparing of their hearts, and ordering of their common affairs beforehand, do not only observe an holy rest all the day from their own works, words, and thoughts about their wordly employments and recreations,[38] but also are taken up the whole time in the public and private exercises of His worship, and in the duties of necessity and mercy.[39]

Paragraph VII shows how the sabbath regulates our lives, VIII summarizes its observance.

As one who used to eat out in restaurants routinely on the Lord's Day (sabbath), I became convicted of the truth of having to make people earn their living (labor) for my convenience. Now, by God's grace, I let them rest and don't demand their work on Sunday.

This has turned out to be a blessing in many ways, including more rest time at home, less spending, inviting over needy people and visitors for a home meal on the Lord's Day. But the perceived benefit is never the motive for obedience-

A holy God commands His people rest, break their ordinary pattern of pursuit of money and entertaining themselves. His creatures disobey at their own peril, and not without consequence.

But I have to say, imperfectly as we try to obey, the sabbath is indeed a first order benefit, and a delight.

 

[Peairtach]

I deny that what Jesus and His disciples did was sabbath-breaking. In fact, it's clear that it was a work of necessity/mercy.

You're right, Jesus and His disciples no more broke the Law than did David (who Jesus refered to as a precedent to underscore his critics' hypocrisy). And again, you're right that it was a work of necessity/mercy.

But I think you're wrong in saying that the comparison doesn't stand.

The Pharisees thought it wasn't necessary. Yet Jesus deemed that it was.
Jesus' disciples doing the work of picking some grain to eat could be construed (by some) as a violation of the 4th commandment. Yet it wasn't. Even though there is absolutely no indication that their lives were not in danger from starvation. Pergy is right in that according to one train of thought these men could have merely fasted the day rather than pick grain on the Sabbath. I think the point is that this biblical example indicates that the bar of acceptability for something to be deemed "necessary" should be lower than "immediate and direct threat to life or limb."

I think Jesus was merely restoring the Sabbath to the way it should be kept as against the many Pharisaical rules and legalisms. Gathering a few berries on the way home from Church or sucking on a sweetie aren't Sabbath-breaking.

We don't read that Jesus and his disciples went to a shop or tavern on the Sabbath because that would be employing and encouraging people in their regular, unecessary work. We'd want to avoid that as much as possible, unless there was no other possibility.

The Pharisees had detailed rules rather than broad principles by which they overthrew the Sabbath. When we study them we see what legalism really is, and realise that the most zealous Christian Sabbatarian doesn't come near.

Activities prohibited on Shabbat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Scott1]

With regard to the disciples plucking grain on the sabbath and not being condemned by Christ.

This related to civil law, given Israel (expired now with the nation, except insofar as the general equity thereof requires), a provision for the unique Old Testament theocracy, Leviticus 23:6.

If you really study this through, I think what Jesus was saying is that the disciples were not (even) violating that law related to plucking grain at certain times. The Pharisees even misunderstood, misapplied that law both in light of its timing and the Lord fulfilling an aspect of the grain being "waived before the Lord."

And they tried to bind men's consciences with something not in the Word of God.

Nor was it a case of Jesus excusing the sin of King David (who ate the showbread in the Temple), for clearly David sinned.

Our Lord contrast that the Pharisees would justify the (clear) lawbreaking of King David on one hand, but then misapply that law in another context- in this case toward what the disciples were doing.

But the disciples were not even sinning under the Levitical law (which does not apply to believers today anyway)!

Now understand, there were many sabbath related laws in the Levital law, for example concerning offerings. Those have expired for all as a standard of righteousness.

It's not a case of our Lord setting aside the rest aspect of sabbath because we spiritually (only) "rest" in Him, or everything is somehow fulfilled in a generic "love" of God (however that might be defined).

But the underlying sabbath, the Lord's Day, the Christian sabbath in the New Testament applies to all men, in all generations- always has, and will until the end of this world.

 

[ADKing]

Since Spurgeon was brought up, I can't help but throw in one of my favorite quotes from him on this topic. I heartily concur with his sentiments, for what it's worth.

There are some persons who have been in the habit of carrying on their trade on the Sabbath. But when they have become Christ's disciples, they have shut up their shops on that day, and people have said to them 'You will be ruined. You will never get a living. You know, we must live.' I have often heard that last little sentence, but I do not believe it. I do not see any necessity for us to live. There is a necessity for us to be true to Christ, but not for us to continue to live. It is a great deal better that we should die than that we should do a wrong thing. And we should be prepared at any time to say 'If need be, we will let our trade go, and we will be poor, but we will keep a clear conscience' (from 2200 Quotations From the Writings of Charles H Spurgeon).

Dr. Peter Masters is full sabbatarian, though as for Sunday employees in the strain of necessity, he comments this on the history of the Metropolitan--and I have to say, it moves me because it was in part Spurgeon's straightforwardness on the issue of the Sabbath that persuaded me to embrace it:

In Spurgeon’s day many members of his congregation worked as servants in large Victorian households, and could worship only at one service each week and often less frequently. To leave their work would have left them without references to other employers (a necessity in those days) and destitute. Many of the 600 young women in Mrs Bartlett’s famous Bible Class were maids who could attend only once in every two or three weeks. Today we know of men who are working long shifts in security jobs, and we know how much they would love to be free throughout the Lord's Day, but cannot be. The churches of Jesus Christ support rather than alienate those whose faith must be lived out in difficult circumstances.

Once in a while a person in normal weekday employment is required to work on Sunday, such as for annual stock taking or audit preparation, and there is no way out. We understand that, especially if that person would be fired if not at work.

Remember the Lord's Day - Is there a

 

[Pergamum]

I deny that what Jesus and His disciples did was sabbath-breaking. In fact, it's clear that it was a work of necessity/mercy. Ergo, the comparison does not stand. I also noted in the last paragraph a need to work through the discussion of the examples and circumstances given. My ultimate point is that we have a duty to work through these things and not just accept them as status quo, never seeking to reform and make things better.

Argh!!!! I broke my word in saying I would post no more. Sorry. No more.

And I deny that working on Sunday due to necessity is Sabbath-breaking.

That is my whole point.

 

[Scott1]

comments below

I think we need to understand our privileged economic position when answering this question. While it may be inconvenient for most of us to struggle finding a decent job, or losing one's job, for many others (the majority of people in the world), it is much more than inconvenience, it is utter despair. Coming out of India and now into Malaysia, I realize how privileged the average Malaysian is compared to Indian, where I used to think Malaysians as underprivileged when I lived in Canada.

I'm understanding your point to be that standard of living is relative to their economy. But, I'm not sure what that has to do with the underlying point- all creatures are commanded to "sabbath" in whatever culture, whatever standard of living they are in. It's not less applicable to someone with humble means than someone with abundant means.

God is not a respecter of persons.

For many people, if they do not find some kind of work, they will starve.

Yes, that's the norm in the whole world, and it is a biblical principle- see II Thessalonians 3:10.


Simple demotion is hardly an option in the developing world. Therefore, I could argue that finding and maintaining a job, any job, is a necessity for most people in the world.

The point is that all mankind must obey the fourth commandment, in every culture. Also, every creature is to work six days, that's the first part. The point is working on the sabbath, replacing work for the worship of God. That's idolatry.

Look at the Biblical example, Dennis, of Israel wandering in the desert. No fixed income, totally and utterly dependent on God. Yet they were commanded not to work on the sabbath. The civil law given Israel even commanded it upon pain of, possibly, death.

God provided enough the night before so they had enough food for the sabbath. When they violated it, God rotted "their" food from the fruits of their sabbath breaking.

Israel in that context was in a desperate economy, yet God provided for them not working on the sabbath.

When God's people violated the sabbath, God did not bless them, His chastisement was upon them.

By the logic you present, if someone's job is working in the poppy field, they must do it, because they need a "job" (let alone they must do it on Sunday). The point is work six, rest one (the sabbath). The Christian is to order his life that way, according to the light of Scripture and trust God to provide for him, his family on that basis.

And to do so with a heart of obedience, looking in faith to God for provision.

This is applicable to all men, in all generations, all tribes, nations, kindreds and tongues, whether of scant or abundant means.

 

[satz]

We are not commanded to fast all day, every sabbath.

We are commanded explicitly, implicitly, and by creation ordinance to cease (sabbath) from our ordinary labor. Remember, the command is to work six days, sabbath one, making it "holy" by prioritizing the worship of God, all day, in a way that is not ordinarily possible the other six days.

Scott,

Sorry for taking a long time to reply.

I didn't say that we were commanded to fast every Sabbath, but based on your reasoning that it is better to lose a job than work on the Sabbath, wouldn't it follow that Jesus' disciples were wrong to pick grain on the Sabbath because they were hungry?

Again, where do you get the definition of necessity as "whether the labor itself is necessary to be done at that time"?

Jesus allowed his disciples to eat when they were hungry, when he could have asked them to endure and fast if definition of necessity was really so strict that life had to be at stake before it applied.

He healed people from non-urgent medical conditions on the Sabbath instead of waiting for the next day and spoke of people getting their ox out of a ditch or leading their ox to water on the Sabbath.

While God was serious about the Sabbath (as indicated by the stoning to death of the man who picked up sticks on the Sabbath in the OT) the bible references we have do not show that a work of necessity is defined so strictly that a life must be at stake, as you are saying. To protect one's livelihood seems just as valid a work of necessity, given the biblical examples we have.

 

[Mushroom]

By the logic you present, if someone's job is working in the poppy field, they must do it, because they need a "job" (let alone they must do it on Sunday).

Huh? Didn't realize that working in a poppy field was prohibited by God's law. Where it is by man's law one could make a case for its sinfulness, but there are plenty of legal poppy fields wherein a christian could labor 6 days a week and not be in sin.

 

[Scott1]

comments below.

We are not commanded to fast all day, every sabbath.

We are commanded explicitly, implicitly, and by creation ordinance to cease (sabbath) from our ordinary labor. Remember, the command is to work six days, sabbath one, making it "holy" by prioritizing the worship of God, all day, in a way that is not ordinarily possible the other six days.

Scott,

Sorry for taking a long time to reply.

I didn't say that we were commanded to fast every Sabbath, but based on your reasoning that it is better to lose a job than work on the Sabbath, wouldn't it follow that Jesus' disciples were wrong to pick grain on the Sabbath because they were hungry?

No, it was not wrong for the disciples to pluck grain and eat it on the sabbath. I don't think it was wrong even under the Levitical law to do so. (It was wrong for David to eat the showbread). The Pharisees missed it on both counts.

Nor did God command us to fast every sabbath.

Again, where do you get the definition of necessity as "whether the labor itself is necessary to be done at that time"?

It's implicit in the command, then explicitly explained in other contexts. Otherwise, the fourth commandment, "Thou shalt do no labor..." has no meaning.

Jesus allowed his disciples to eat when they were hungry, when he could have asked them to endure and fast if definition of necessity was really so strict that life had to be at stake before it applied.

Yes, but you are going back to what you just said you were not asserting, i.e.
that somehow we are commanded to fast on every sabbath.

Not working, "do no labor" is not the same thing as eating an ordinary meal. The "necessity" of the labor itself, not the general necessity of eating at a certain time, is what the commandment is about. The heart of the fourth commandment is work, rest and worship. So the "excepted" principles in Scripture apply to the ordinary labor of the other six days. Remember, that's the first part of the fourth commandment.

He healed people from non-urgent medical conditions on the Sabbath instead of waiting for the next day and spoke of people getting their ox out of a ditch or leading their ox to water on the Sabbath.




While God was serious about the Sabbath (as indicated by the stoning to death of the man who picked up sticks on the Sabbath in the OT) the bible references we have do not show that a work of necessity is defined so strictly that a life must be at stake, as you are saying.

It was even "worse" than that. Read the Levitical law- the death penalty for bundling sticks on the sabbath. Be glad we are not under that civil law given Israel as a "church under age."

To protect one's livelihood seems just as valid a work of necessity, given the biblical examples we have.

What would the commandment mean then?

Are you saying keeping a particular job is more important than keeping the sabbath, corporate worship and working the other six?

---------- Post added at 09:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:30 PM ----------

Huh? Didn't realize that working in a poppy field was prohibited by God's law. Where it is by man's law one could make a case for its sinfulness, but there are plenty of legal poppy fields

Yes, Brad you are correct.

Poppy seeds are tasty on bagels and other foods.

The context here, though was intended, "poppy fields" heroine producing drug fields, rampant in certain parts of the world. The point being the end of earning money does not trump the need to obey the fourth commandment.

 

[ZackF]

I find it difficult to define "necessity." Most of us think of the immediate necessity of life-threatening injury or the spiritual work of a pastor. But consider the down and out person struggling to find work in this declining economy. Sometimes a security guard post is the best he can get. I think it's spiritualizing to insist that he simply "trust God to provide."

By the way does anyone on the PB go out for lunch after Sunday service? Isn't this causing restaurant staff to work on Sundays?

I've eaten out Sunday's after lunch. My point here though is the dangerous task picking and choosing of occupations and rating them spiritually. A recipe for judgementalism if there ever is one. For example a family doctor is given "mercy" provision but an assistant manager of a big box retail store providing for his family is not? Likewise does a policeman get a dispensation but not a security guard? Hotel workers? Surely some of the Puritan WCF drafters were or knew godly inn keepers that didn't throw their traveling patrons out on Sundays!