For Those Who Do Not Sanctify One Day Over Another

Status
Not open for further replies.

KMK

Administrator
Staff member
Some have said that they do not believe the Bible teaches NT Christians to sanctify one day out of seven.

For those who hold this view, tell me where my logic fails:

God does not command Christians to sanctify one day in 7. To do so would be to follow the commandments of men and not of God. This would be hypocrisy. (Mark 7) Therefore, Christians should never sanctify one day in seven or they are guilty of hypocrisy.

If my logic is correct, then those who dont believe they are to sanctify one day in 7 should be gathering for worship on different days of the week because the only reason most churches meet on Sunday is because of man-made tradition.
 
I don't know if this helps brother but I believe that christians sould meet on the 1rst day of the week. I do not believe that the 1rst day is the sabbath.
We should also take every opportunity to meet at any time possible.
If I were a sabbatarian, I would observe it Friday evening through Saturday evening. I believe the NT to be clear in its teaching for us to meet on the 1rst day of the week. In that sense it is to be set apart, or sanctified.

Mitch Cervinka has an excellent piece that addresses this issue very well. It is worth the read:

THE SABBATH AND THE LORD'S DAY

Saturday Sabbath – The Saturday Sabbath (as commanded by the Mosaic Law) is to be observed by Christians.
Sunday Sabbath – The Sabbath command was modified by our Lord, moving the Sabbath to Sunday.
Lord's Day – There is no Sabbath for Christians, but Sunday is "The Lord's Day", reserved for worship.
No Special Days – Every day is holy. We are not to regard one day above another.
 
Last edited:
because the only reason most churches meet on Sunday is because of man-made tradition.

Yes - but in this case, the 'men' are the members of the church in Acts.

If my logic is correct, then those who dont believe they are to sanctify one day in 7 should be gathering for worship on different days of the week

I attend some sort of gathering on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and 2 each on Saturday and Sunday. Is that what you're referring to?
 
Ken,
I'm a Sunday-sabbatarian, but I'd like to point out what I think is improper about your argument.

Your first premise is in the negative. It simply states "God has not commanded..." So that statement alone doesn't speak to the question of what some person may do, unless you also postulate a version of the Regulative Principle, i.e unless God commands something re. worship, it should not be done.

Here are a few premises I think a person on any side should admit:
1) God expects worship from his people
2) Worship may be individual or corporate
3) As soon as two people meet for worship a second time, they are engaged in periodic worship

Thus, meetings for worship must be either a prescribed element or a circumstance of worship. If circumstance, then one cannot fault those who are meeting periodically every 7 days according to convention (not prescription).

Question: Does this periodic worship have to be *studiedly* irregular, if God has not commanded a "period" (say, 7 days) of any kind?

Answer: I don't think this question can be answered in the affirmative. Therefore on the principle being advocated, theoretically (assuming no divine command) worship could be held every 10 days, or 100 days, or on the 1st of every month, etc. Which then becomes a "one day in X" observance.

In other words,, I don't think you can accuse anyone who meets on a 7-day period with "hypocrisy" as long as they are not meeting for any reason other than "convention." However, ingrained habit (especially after 2000 years) certainly takes on law-like character. So where are all the churches breaking with tradition, for the sake of making their point (i.e. "we aren't bound by a law!")?

I tell you what I do see--I see plenty of people who decide on their own what sort of "worship periodicity" they practice. And who is there to tell them they shouldn't? If the Bible doesn't prescribe it, then neither can their church or it's leaders. Just because the church may want them there at least 3 out of 4 Sunday's a month (at the "regular, non-prescribed" meetings)? "ONE Sunday a month is OK with me!" Vowing submission only means submission to the elder's ministerial declaration of sin and righteousness and judgment. Maybe "Joe" feels the need (in his conscience) to flout "convention" so that he doesn't get caught up in "man-made law".
 
Mitch Cervinka has an excellent piece that addresses this issue very well. It is worth the read:

THE SABBATH AND THE LORD'S DAY

Surprise, surprise, the excellence of the article is disputed--by sabbatarians.

From the article:
On the other hand, there are aspects of the Sabbath command that are moral in nature:

1) We have a moral obligation to exercise mercy by periodically granting rest to servants and even to beasts of burden.

2) We have a moral obligation to set aside time periodically for worship and the contemplation of God.

3) We have a moral obligation to grant time periodically to servants and employees that they may worship God.​

But the matter of when, how often, and how long to do this are a matter of special revelation rather than of natural law, imprinted on the conscience. Or, in the absence of special revelation, they are a matter of personal judgment, common sense and mercy.
This whole question turns on whether a) the sabbath is a creation ordinance, which is stoutly denied immediately by the author; and b) that Christ has NOT personally and specifically directed in Scripture a pattern of Sunday worship in the post-resurrection era. We deny both premises.

As for the idea that our gatherings are simply a matter of human opinion, then no-one's opinon is any better than anyone else', least of all church dignities. They could call a meeting every day, or once a year, and it still wouldn't matter if anyone showed up, because person X thinks every 7 days is "not forsaking the assembly" (in his opinon--good enough for the Jews, good enough for me), person Y thinks every 10 days (don't wan't to be "legalistic" now), and person Z every 2 years (he's an awfully busy man).
 
I don't know if this helps brother but I believe that christians sould meet on the 1rst day of the week. I do not believe that the 1rst day is the sabbath.
We should also take every opportunity to meet at any time possible.
If I were a sabbatarian, I would observe it Friday evening through Saturday evening. I believe the NT to be clear in its teaching for us to meet on the 1rst day of the week. In that sense it is to be set apart, or sanctified.

Mitch Cervinka has an excellent piece that addresses this issue very well. It is worth the read:

THE SABBATH AND THE LORD'S DAY

Saturday Sabbath – The Saturday Sabbath (as commanded by the Mosaic Law) is to be observed by Christians.
Sunday Sabbath – The Sabbath command was modified by our Lord, moving the Sabbath to Sunday.
Lord's Day – There is no Sabbath for Christians, but Sunday is "The Lord's Day", reserved for worship.
No Special Days – Every day is holy. We are not to regard one day above another.

So the 'moral' aspect of the 4th commandment still applies, but the 'sabbatical' aspect does not. Is that correct?
 
Ken,
I'm a Sunday-sabbatarian, but I'd like to point out what I think is improper about your argument.

Your first premise is in the negative. It simply states "God has not commanded..." So that statement alone doesn't speak to the question of what some person may do, unless you also postulate a version of the Regulative Principle, i.e unless God commands something re. worship, it should not be done.
Good point!

Here are a few premises I think a person on any side should admit:
1) God expects worship from his people
2) Worship may be individual or corporate
3) As soon as two people meet for worship a second time, they are engaged in periodic worship

Is not corporate worship also *expected*?

Thus, meetings for worship must be either a prescribed element or a circumstance of worship. If circumstance, then one cannot fault those who are meeting periodically every 7 days according to convention (not prescription).

If one believes that 'when' corporate worship occurs is circumstancial then they are free to meet whenever is convenient. But as you mention, what is convenient is established by 2000 years of so called 'tradition'.

Question: Does this periodic worship have to be *studiedly* irregular, if God has not commanded a "period" (say, 7 days) of any kind?

Answer: I don't think this question can be answered in the affirmative. Therefore on the principle being advocated, theoretically (assuming no divine command) worship could be held every 10 days, or 100 days, or on the 1st of every month, etc. Which then becomes a "one day in X" observance.

In other words,, I don't think you can accuse anyone who meets on a 7-day period with "hypocrisy" as long as they are not meeting for any reason other than "convention." However, ingrained habit (especially after 2000 years) certainly takes on law-like character. So where are all the churches breaking with tradition, for the sake of making their point (i.e. "we aren't bound by a law!")?

The reason they don't is because it is next to impossible for the whole body to gather with anny regularity unless it is on Sat or Sun.

I tell you what I do see--I see plenty of people who decide on their own what sort of "worship periodicity" they practice. And who is there to tell them they shouldn't? If the Bible doesn't prescribe it, then neither can their church or it's leaders. Just because the church may want them there at least 3 out of 4 Sunday's a month (at the "regular, non-prescribed" meetings)? "ONE Sunday a month is OK with me!" Vowing submission only means submission to the elder's ministerial declaration of sin and righteousness and judgment. Maybe "Joe" feels the need (in his conscience) to flout "convention" so that he doesn't get caught up in "man-made law".

Excellent observations Bruce!
 
So the 'moral' aspect of the 4th commandment still applies, but the 'sabbatical' aspect does not. Is that correct?


I guess so, sort of. We are to come together on the Lord's day. I believe though that our resting from our labors in Christ fulfills the sabbath.
 
I guess so, sort of. We are to come together on the Lord's day. I believe though that our resting from our labors in Christ fulfills the sabbath.

James, both of us (and I assume everyone else) would agree that keeping the Lord's Day holy for the purpose of corporate worship does not make anyone any more righteous. Our righteousness is in Christ alone. :handshake:

My question is not so much directed at you as to those that Bruce describes. The problem that I am wrestling with is how to encourage anti-sabbatarians to commit to Lord's Day worship. Some of them are so militant about their views that if you even suggest that they should commit to coming to church on the Lord's Day (they have no trouble expecting the pastor to do so BTW) they cry, "Legalism!" Well, if it is indeed 'legalistic' to commit to Lord's Day worship, then it seems to me that whatever you do you better not come to church on the Lord's Day or you are guilty of hypocrisy.
 
Sanctify, is the loaded word here, I think we should certainly set this day apart out of tradition for worship and any other introspection for our Lord. But to recognize the apprpriate sanctification of Sunday is much different than recognizing it as a command to observe it (Sunday not Saturday a peculiar problem) as prescribed in the Mosaic Law. It should be taken very seriously to tell the non-sabatarian that he or she is in direct disobediance to what God requires.
 
Sanctify, is the loaded word here, I think we should certainly set this day apart out of tradition for worship and any other introspection for our Lord. But to recognize the apprpriate sanctification of Sunday is much different than recognizing it as a command to observe it (Sunday not Saturday a peculiar problem) as prescribed in the Mosaic Law. It should be taken very seriously to tell the non-sabatarian that he or she is in direct disobediance to what God requires.

I agree that 'sanctify' is a loaded word, but its definition is 'to set apart for holy use'. Thus to set apart Sunday as a day to go to church, is to 'sanctify' one day in 7.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top