Sabbath was made for man.

Status
Not open for further replies.
[Moderator]Let me remind everyone of the confessional position on the matter, from the WCF chapter 21: while questions and explanations are certainly welcome, arguments directed against this are not acceptable on the board:

VII. As it is of 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 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 in Scripture is called the Lord's Day, and is to be continued to the end of the world as the Christian Sabbath.

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 worldly employments and recreations; 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.

Arguing for the rejection of any of these affirmations will result in deleted posts or infractions.
[/Moderator]

Dabney's treatment, which can be found in a PDF called "The Christian Sabbath" at this page, is the second best treatment I've read.
 
[Moderator]Let me remind everyone of the confessional position on the matter, from the WCF chapter 21: while questions and explanations are certainly welcome, arguments directed against this are not acceptable on the board:

VII. As it is of 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 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 in Scripture is called the Lord's Day, and is to be continued to the end of the world as the Christian Sabbath.

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 worldly employments and recreations; 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.

Arguing for the rejection of any of these affirmations will result in deleted posts or infractions.
[/Moderator]

Dabney's treatment, which can be found in a PDF called "The Christian Sabbath" at this page, is the second best treatment I've read.

Not to say I disagree but did you notice the question William Price asked? It comes from a general tome of this board that does give the impression that the keeping of the sabbath is required to be saved. I do realize this is a board that takes the 3rd step beyond catholic and evangelical and I love it for that but one can be "shut down" quite quickly like it is "an essential of the faith" by espousing or believing differently on the sabbath here. Take this for just an obsrvation as evidenced by Mr. Prices question.
 
And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him. Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. Let no one disqualify you, insisting on asceticism and worship of angels, going on in detail about visions, puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind, and not holding fast to the Head, from whom the whole body, nourished and knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth that is from God. If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations-- "Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch" (referring to things that all perish as they are used)--according to human precepts and teachings? These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh. (Colossians 2:13-23)

I'll let scripture speak for itself.

The Sabbath spoken of there in Colossians 2.16 is not the Christian Sabbath, but the Jewish Sabbath, as the context clearly demonstrates.

"Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:"

The text speaks of the Jewish kosher law, the Jewish holy days, the Jewish new moons, and the Jewish sabbaths. In order to avoid confusion, the New Testament regularly calls the Christian Sabbath "the Lord's Day," because there were still Jewish believers in those days who kept the Jewish Sabbath. For that matter, the Apostle Paul still kept the Jewish Sabbath, to be a Jew to the Jews. He regularly attended synagogue services, whenever possible, in order to preach the Gospel to the Jews.

But Paul also, by the perfect inspiration of the Spirit, tells the Colossian believers, who, for the most part were Gentiles, that they were not bound by the Jewish kosher laws, the Jewish holy days, the Jewish new moons, or the Jewish Shabbat. They were only bound to keep the Moral Law of the Ten Commandments.

Now, the Fourth Commandment is fulfilled in the keeping of the Christian Sabbath, not the Jewish Sabbath, and therefore, no believer is bound to keep the Jewish Shabbat, unless it be to avoid putting a stumblingblock before the Jews with respect to the Gospel. Which is why I myself do not do any work outside my house, or go to the store, in Jerusalem, on the Jewish Shabbath. I do not want my good to be evil spoken of.

---------- Post added at 04:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:54 PM ----------

I am looking for help is fleshing out this idea and what it means to the Christian. I am looking for comments in regard to the Christian's enjoyment, pleasure and joy derived from the Sabbath as well as the Christian's duties with regards to the Lord's Day.

Willie,

It is so nice to see an inquiring soul desirous to keep the Sabbath Day, the Lord's Day, holy. I recommend most warmly to you the sermons contained in Andrew Bonar's Memoirs and Remains of Robert Murray M'Cheyne. M'Cheyne has a couple of very moving sermons in defence of the Christian Sabbath. I highly recommend them.
 
Can someone give me a clear and concise passage in the New testament which defines the Christian sabbath, or a command to keep it?
 
OK, allow me to go a bit further...

The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath. When we look at sabbath, we look at the sabbath as a day set apart unto the Lord. But, I know some who relegate this to only one day, Sunday. I agree to keeping the sabbath unto the Lord, but should we not strive to keep everyday unto the Lord. Remember, we are under an even higher law now.

The law of Moses said to give a tenth agriculturally of all crops. The law of Christ says that we should give all as unto the Lord. The law of Moses puts forth one day as holy. The law of Christ demands every breath and every thought to be conformed to the image of Christ. I hope this makes sense.

William, yes, we *of course* are to "strive to keep everyday unto the Lord," but that's not really the issue at hand. Just because every day is to be lived in service to our Lord does not mean that this is accomplished in the same way on each of those days. Six days a week, man is to serve God in his vocation, striving after his glory, walking in righteousness and piety, sanctifying the day in prayer, etc. Sunday is also to be lived in service to God, however it is to be observed after a different manner: for the other days, while they are to be lived in faithful service to God, are most faithfully discharged by having us about our worldly and necessary duties in a faithful and holy manner; Sunday, however, is the day that we are to put aside these duties and attend upon the public worship of God. So it is not that the other days are lived unto the Lord any less, it is just that the duties by which we serve God are different -- God commands that we serve him after a unique manner on the Sabbath.

Do remember, based upon what you said above, that while the Sabbath was commanded to be observed under Moses, it was instituted in Eden. It was there that God sanctified and set apart the day: the law as delivered by Moses did not set apart the Sabbath; it merely commanded that the church observe what had been sanctified from creation. This also means that the Sabbath cannot strictly be a soteric ordinance, but is also an eschatalogical ordinance with soteric significance: and so long as we await the consummation of all things, "there remaineth therefore a keeping of the Sabbath for the people of God."
 
Can someone give me a clear and concise passage in the New testament which defines the Christian sabbath, or a command to keep it?

So far as defining the Christian Sabbath in the NT you will get replies that conform to the confessional standards here which are derive from all of scripture, old and new. So far as a command to keep it (not for salvation BTW) I think all here will agree that it falls under the moral law of God thus should be kept, like the command to love God with all your heart. :)
 
Can someone give me a clear and concise passage in the New testament which defines the Christian sabbath, or a command to keep it?

This is a very nice and honest question. The answer is, some commandments are given by explicit apostolic precept, or by explicit precept from Christ Himself. Others, however, are given by apostolic example. In other words, we know that the apostles were taught of Christ, and if in fact they observed a given commandment, that commandment must have come from Christ, either in the forty days they communed with him before His ascension, or by direct revelation of the Holy Ghost. In either case, however, whether the apostolic observance was by direct command in the Scriptures, or by apostolic example, nonetheless, we are duty-bound to observe it. They taught us the commandment, whether by express precept, or by apostolic example.

1 Corinthians 4.6 "Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ."

Now: in Acts 20.7, we find the following apostolic example:

"And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight."

The Greek there uses an idiomatic phrase, "the first of the Sabbaths," for "the first day of the week." The fact that the phrase is idiomatic, however, is manifested by the irregularity of gender. "First" is in the feminine gender; "sabbaths" is in the neuter gender. Thus, the phrase cannot mean "the first of the Sabbaths."

The Greek word for "day," however, is feminine: and thus, the feminine word "day" is implied. Moreover, the word "sabbaths" is often used by metonymy for "week." When the Pharisee says "I fast twice in the week," (Luke 18.12) he literally says in the Greek, "I fast twice in the sabbath." But all translations translate the phrase as "twice in the week," because they acknowledge the Greek idiom. The "week" is there described by metonomy, by the most important day of that week.

So: returning to Acts 20.7, we see that Paul gathered together with the brethren in Troas, on the first day of the week, which, the Holy Ghost tells us, was the day in which they assembled together for prayers, for the hearing of God's Word, for the singing of His praises, and for the breaking of bread.

In those early days, the disciples did nothing but what had been commanded them by the apostles through the Lord Jesus Christ. Indeed, Paul would never have allowed this worship by the disciples, except it had been commanded by Christ. This was Christ's last command to the apostles while on earth:

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Christ's express command to the disciples was that they teach the disciples to observe all things whatsoever He had commanded them.

Therefore, their assembling on the Lord's Day, the first day of the week, had to have been at the express command of Christ. Because the apostles only kept that worship which Christ commanded.

And accordingly, in Acts 20.7 and 1 Corinthians 16.7, we see that the disciples assembled for the worship of God, because thus the apostles had commanded them; and the apostles commanded it, because the Lord Jesus had thus commanded them.

Now: it is well-known that the Jewish Sabbath was a day for instruction. The Levites were commanded in the Old Testament to hold synagogue services in the communities where they dwelt, and they were to instruct the people in the Scriptures on the Lord's Day. Thus also did the schools of the prophets in Samaria during the days of Elijah and Elishah. Solemn assemblies of believers for instruction from the Word have always been commanded to be on the Sabbath day.

Thus, it follows that, if the apostles commanded the disciples to gather on the Lord's Day for the worship of God, and for the hearing of the Word, that day then must be the Christian Sabbath. It must be the day of worship as commanded by Christ, because the apostles only did that in worship which Christ commanded them.

This is the view that was universally held by the early Church, as A A Hodge proves in the following article:

Sabbath, The Day Changed: The Sabbath Preserved

I highly recommend this article.
 
Can someone give me a clear and concise passage in the New testament which defines the Christian sabbath, or a command to keep it?

Of course: Heb. 4:1-11. More fundamentally, however, the NT teaches that the law is still the law, and gives overwhelming testimony that the moral law of God is summarized in the 10 Commandments. Consider well, for example, Eph. 6:2-3. Given the fact that the command to observe the Sabbath is a part of the 10 Commandments -- that law which was placed in the Ark of the Covenant as the justice upon which God's throne was founded, and on account of which the blood of atonement had to be sprinkled --, one would have to provide pretty good evidence that the fourth commandment is for some reason supposed to be ripped out from the middle of the 10 Commandments (which the NT considers to still be a single unit). The ceremonial law is fulfilled in Christ, and the judicial expired with the passing of the Judaical polity, but the moral law stands firm forever, and neither one jot nor one tittle shall in any wise pass away until all be fulfilled.
 
Must you keep sabbath to be saved then?

Of course not, though I will admit most times the subject comes up here one can certainly get the impression it is thought of so on this board. Just an honest observation.

This is a pretty loaded comment to make. I think if you are going to make statements like this, you should back it up. Where has anyone on this board ever made that statement or even implied it? On the contrary this board upholds the biblical, confessional teaching that salvation comes by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. Christ is the only one who ever upheld the law perfectly. The law condemns us, never saves us, so I am having a hard time seeing how you think anyone on this board would teach that we are saved by obeying the 4th commandment or any commandment.
 
Must you keep sabbath to be saved then?

Not to say I disagree but did you notice the question William Price asked? It comes from a general tome of this board that does give the impression that the keeping of the sabbath is required to be saved. I do realize this is a board that takes the 3rd step beyond catholic and evangelical and I love it for that but one can be "shut down" quite quickly like it is "an essential of the faith" by espousing or believing differently on the sabbath here. Take this for just an obsrvation as evidenced by Mr. Prices question.

I did notice the question. I think the answer to it is the same as your answer to "Must I keep the first or third or fifth or seventh or ninth commandment to be saved?" The question is phrased ambiguously. Does it mean, "Must I keep the fourth commandment perfectly in order to be saved?" If your righteousness were by the law, yes; but Christ has kept it perfectly for us. Does that mean that I can be indifferent to whether I keep it or not? Well, just as indifferent as I can be to keeping the commands against covetousness, theft, murder and idolatry.

While we certainly permit discussion as to what a commandment requires, the Confession is our agreed-upon interpretation, and so questions as to whether the commandment is authoritative are out of bounds, because the Confession is very clear (XIX.5):
The moral law doth forever bind all, as well justified persons as others, to the obedience thereof; and that not only in regard of the matter contained in it, but also in respect of the authority of God the Creator who gave it. Neither doth Christ in the gospel any way dissolve, but much strengthen, this obligation.
 
Must you keep sabbath to be saved then?

Of course not, though I will admit most times the subject comes up here one can certainly get the impression it is thought of so on this board. Just an honest observation.

This is a pretty loaded comment to make. I think if you are going to make statements like this, you should back it up. Where has anyone on this board ever made that statement or even implied it? On the contrary this board upholds the biblical, confessional teaching that salvation comes by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. Christ is the only one who ever upheld the law perfectly. The law condemns us, never saves us, so I am having a hard time seeing how you think anyone on this board would teach that we are saved by obeying the 4th commandment or any commandment.

I made an observation based on the question that was asked.....nothing more or less.....though my explanation on how one is "corrected" on this board concerning The Lord's Day can and does lead to questions asked like the one in discussion. The problem with "we the reformed" is that when we point out people are sinning, and indeed are doing so, we come across as more condemning than gracious.
 
OK, allow me to go a bit further...

The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath. When we look at sabbath, we look at the sabbath as a day set apart unto the Lord. But, I know some who relegate this to only one day, Sunday. I agree to keeping the sabbath unto the Lord, but should we not strive to keep everyday unto the Lord. Remember, we are under an even higher law now.

The law of Moses said to give a tenth agriculturally of all crops. The law of Christ says that we should give all as unto the Lord. The law of Moses puts forth one day as holy. The law of Christ demands every breath and every thought to be conformed to the image of Christ. I hope this makes sense.

Look at the fourth commandment closely.

It is two parts:

1) sabbath "cease" and keep holy "set apart" one day in seven
2) work the other six days

God commands us to work the other six days, so the "sabbath" makes one day different from the rest.

Exodus 20

8Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

9Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:

10But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:

One way the sabbath day is "made for man" is that man is not consigned to unending work, he is allowed, commanded to rest and require others under his charge to rest and to focus on God one whole day.

In this (Exodus and Deuteronomy) God commands man to remember His twin attributes of Creation, and Redemption. That's creation of man. Redemption of man.

Must you keep sabbath to be saved then?

I know there are a lot of responses here, and hope this will be helpful and clear.

In a sense, we must keep all God's commands. They are summarily comprehended in the Ten Commandments, which includes Commandment Four.

God commands all His creatures to obey his moral perpetual commandments (including work six, sabbath one).

God is just in condemning every one who disobeys Him, to any degree.

But, only Jesus Christ perfectly kept all the Commandments. He alone perfectly obeyed God. He kept the sabbath.

It is faith in that- Christ's righteousness alone that justifies us for salvation.

If your question is more along what are the consequences of disobedience of the Fourth Commandment (work six, sabbath one), the doctrine of Scripture is summarized well in the Westminster Larger Catechism:

Westminster Larger Catechism

Q. 28. What are the punishments of sin in this world?

A. The punishments of sin in this world are either inward, as blindness of mind,[101] a reprobate sense,[102] strong delusions,[103] hardness of heart,[104] horror of conscience,[105] and vile affections;[106] or outward, as the curse of God upon the creatures of our sakes,[107] and all other evils that befall us in our bodies, names, estates, relations, and employments;[108] together with death itself.[109]

Q. 29. What are the punishments of sin in the world to come?

A. The punishments of sin in the world to come, are everlasting separation from the comfortable presence of God, and most grievous torments in soul and body, without intermission, in hell-fire forever.[110]

It is a sin to not obey the fourth commandment. It is sin to misrepresent what it is. It is one grounds for which the wrath of God is coming in judgment.

The misery of consequences are felt in this life, and accountability of the believer at the Judgment Seat. For the unbeliever, who refused to order his life to cease pursuit of self and "make holy" one day, it is one more grounds for his condemnation.
 
Can someone give me a clear and concise passage in the New testament which defines the Christian sabbath, or a command to keep it?

A great question. No, I can't give you a clear and concise passage in the NT which spells out the requirements of the Lord's Day. However, we must be careful. Explicit warrant for something isn't a sufficient criterion for establishing what the NT means to teach. Let me give you a couple of examples:

1. nowhere in the NT is it explicitly commanded that a woman may participate in the Lord's Supper, nor is there any historical account of a woman doing so. There is simply no "clear and concise passage" which commands or demonstrates it. However, none of us would seriously use the absence of "explicit warrant" as an argument against it. Instead, we infer from a web of theological ideas that Christian women can participate.
2.the word "love" does not appear once in the book of Acts. Does the absence of a "clear and concise" reference to God's love for the world (as in, say John 3:16) mean that the early church did not consider the Gospel message to include the concept of God's love for the world?
3. With one exception, all references in the NT to "disciples" are men. Does this mean that the church was mainly filled with male disciples?

All I'm trying to say is that explicit warrant is a poor criterion for establishing doctrine. Such is the case when deliberating on matters relating to the Lord's Day.

blessings.
 
Must you keep sabbath to be saved then?

Of course not, though I will admit most times the subject comes up here one can certainly get the impression it is thought of so on this board. Just an honest observation.

This is a pretty loaded comment to make. I think if you are going to make statements like this, you should back it up. Where has anyone on this board ever made that statement or even implied it? On the contrary this board upholds the biblical, confessional teaching that salvation comes by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. Christ is the only one who ever upheld the law perfectly. The law condemns us, never saves us, so I am having a hard time seeing how you think anyone on this board would teach that we are saved by obeying the 4th commandment or any commandment.

I made an observation based on the question that was asked.....nothing more or less.....though my explanation on how one is "corrected" on this board concerning The Lord's Day can and does lead to questions asked like the one in discussion. The problem with "we the reformed" is that when we point out people are sinning, and indeed are doing so, we come across as more condemning than gracious.

Again, sir I press you to back up this last statement. Where has anyone on this board done what you have accused? It occurs quite reguarly here on this board where someone does not completely understand or does not completely agree with the 4th Commandment. Everytime this comes up in any thread, there have always been several posters who explain the confessional understanding of the 4th commandment. Because this board is confessional, it does not allow contra-confessional arguments. I fail to see how any of this is ungracious or how at any point anyone equated keeping the sabbath with salvation.
 
We do rest in Christ and His completed work by faith everyday, but while we are in this world, we can only properly enter into that Rest that He has purchased for us in a special way for the good of our souls and the glory of Godby setting aside time to enjoy that Rest with him by setting aside one day in Seven.

This is why Christians became monks, although they were taking the whole idea of shutting out the world and spending time in rest, quiet, meditation, and contemplation of Christ in an unbiblical direction, and how many of them really understood the true way of salvation?

The typology of the Seven Day Week and the weekly Sabbath will remain from its establishment before the Fall until it is swallowed up in the New Order, when the saints are raised from their graves like Christ. and fully enjoy their Heavenly Eschatalogical rest, body and soul, with Christ forever.

If you don't observe the weekly Sabbath, why do you observe a Seven Day Week. The Seven Day Week was specially revealed along with the Sabbath, and is part of the typology of which the Heavenly Eschatalogical Rest is the antitype. Hence all the sevens in the Book of Revelation. Each week and each event, in this period in which we live, is a reminder that we are getting closer to the Eschaton and the Perfect World.

To observe the Seven Day Week and neglect the Sabbath, is to hold to part of the typology while neglecting the part you want to neglect. It is not to free yourself from all of the typology of the Seven Day Week and the Sabbath that was originally established when Man was created.

If evangelicals really think they can get by without spending adequate time in prayer, meditation, enjoying time contemplating and having fellowship with Christ, fully entering into the meaning of that Rest that He has bought for them with His precious blood if they believe, then why are they surprised when the evangelical congragations and denominations are in the less than healthy state they are in.
 
Last edited:
Why is it always the 2nd and 4th Commandments that men contend for the fact that they are without guile?

In other words, when it comes to these commandments, why are we so convinced that we've kept the Law of God perfectly and do not need the Blood of Christ to atone for our lack of obedience to the full weight of the Law?

If Christ was to have mentioned to the Rich Young Ruler: "You know the Commandments, Honor the Sabbath to keep it holy..." and the Rich Young Ruler would have stated: "All these I have kept from my youth..." then we would see through the young ruler's lack of appreciation for the Law of God just as we see it in his insistence that he kept other commandments.

The Law is perfect and good and we need not look at ways to "loophole" out of the weight of any commandment. Can a man be saved who is a lawbreaker? With man this is impossible but with Christ all things are possible.

Let us remind ourselves that Christ was nailed to the Cross for the sins of man and we do not delight in that which wounded our Head. However you form the requirements of the 4th Commandment, please do not cheapen the Law of God by placing a fence around it and convincing yourself that your obedience is somehow the full measure of the command.
 
Must you keep sabbath to be saved then?

Of course not, though I will admit most times the subject comes up here one can certainly get the impression it is thought of so on this board. Just an honest observation.

This is a pretty loaded comment to make. I think if you are going to make statements like this, you should back it up. Where has anyone on this board ever made that statement or even implied it? On the contrary this board upholds the biblical, confessional teaching that salvation comes by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. Christ is the only one who ever upheld the law perfectly. The law condemns us, never saves us, so I am having a hard time seeing how you think anyone on this board would teach that we are saved by obeying the 4th commandment or any commandment.

I made an observation based on the question that was asked.....nothing more or less.....though my explanation on how one is "corrected" on this board concerning The Lord's Day can and does lead to questions asked like the one in discussion. The problem with "we the reformed" is that when we point out people are sinning, and indeed are doing so, we come across as more condemning than gracious.

Again, sir I press you to back up this last statement. Where has anyone on this board done what you have accused? It occurs quite reguarly here on this board where someone does not completely understand or does not completely agree with the 4th Commandment. Everytime this comes up in any thread, there have always been several posters who explain the confessional understanding of the 4th commandment. Because this board is confessional, it does not allow contra-confessional arguments. I fail to see how any of this is ungracious or how at any point anyone equated keeping the sabbath with salvation.

I will allow you to read my first response to your post.....sir. (Personally I would not use "sir" unless you want to appear as someone I doubt you are) :cheers2:

BTW I agree no one here does anything that undermines faith alone for salvation. All I said we I think we ought to be more gracious and when it comes to The Lords Day, and the moderators ought to keep the "this is a confessional board gun" in the holster a tad longer. The previous is solely an opinion and I am sure I simply just disagree with our fine moderators in this area, which BTY do a great job In my most humble opinion.
 
Keeping, or trying to keep, the Sabbath or any of the Commandments is not necessary for justification, because justification is by faith alone.

Sometimes the word "salvation" is used lossely when the word justification would be better. Technically speaking "salvation" is a broader concept that includes regeneration, faith, repentance, justification and adoption, sanctification, perfection in sanctification at death, the resurrection of the body, etc, etc

I would say that keeping/trying to keep the Sabbath is necessary for, or a concommitant of, salvation.

He was to be called "Jesus" because He would save His people from their sins. If breaking the Sabbath, more deliberately or through poor, e.g. dispensational, teaching, is a sin, as it must be, then how can we be saved from Sabbath-breaking except by our hearts being taught by the Spirit of Christ, to keep the Sabbath (more correctly) and putting that into practice?

Of course, it is always possible to emphasise Sabbath-keeping and neglect other Commandments, but that is the same with them all.

---------- Post added at 01:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:48 PM ----------

Scripture quote from Bill (Price)
And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross.

To push the analogy slightly further,

I can see how what was written on vellum could be nailed to Jesus' Cross, but not what was written on stone tablets. The Weekly Sabbath was written on stone tablets, as was the rest of the 10C, the summary of the moral law.
 
Can someone give me a clear and concise passage in the New testament which defines the Christian sabbath, or a command to keep it?

A great question. No, I can't give you a clear and concise passage in the NT which spells out the requirements of the Lord's Day. However, we must be careful. Explicit warrant for something isn't a sufficient criterion for establishing what the NT means to teach. Let me give you a couple of examples:

1. nowhere in the NT is it explicitly commanded that a woman may participate in the Lord's Supper, nor is there any historical account of a woman doing so. There is simply no "clear and concise passage" which commands or demonstrates it. However, none of us would seriously use the absence of "explicit warrant" as an argument against it. Instead, we infer from a web of theological ideas that Christian women can participate.
2.the word "love" does not appear once in the book of Acts. Does the absence of a "clear and concise" reference to God's love for the world (as in, say John 3:16) mean that the early church did not consider the Gospel message to include the concept of God's love for the world?
3. With one exception, all references in the NT to "disciples" are men. Does this mean that the church was mainly filled with male disciples?

All I'm trying to say is that explicit warrant is a poor criterion for establishing doctrine. Such is the case when deliberating on matters relating to the Lord's Day.

blessings.

Good points, all.

With the fourth commandment, we do have many explicit commands in the Old Testament. So, one would have to say the Old Testament is not connected in the same truth as the New. This kind of disconnection is commonly what a dispensational approach to Scripture does. It "cuts off" and "divides" the Word. That is not reformed theology, which is why I now understand that any minimal definition of "reformed theology" must include:

doctrines of Grace ("five points") + covenant theology + confession.

But with the fourth commandment, we have much, much more to go on even if we wrongly accept the notion that each of the ten commandments much be explicitly "re-commanded" in the New Testament to be binding today.

Jesus kept the sabbath, and that was recorded in a normative way. When challenging the Pharisees, our Lord was refuting the man-made teachings they had added to it. Often, in doing that- He referred to the Old Testament.

For example:

Matthew 12

1At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungred, and began to pluck the ears of corn and to eat.

2But when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day.

3But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him;

4How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?

5Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?

6But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple.

7But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.

8For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.

9And when he was departed thence, he went into their synagogue:

10And, behold, there was a man which had his hand withered. And they asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath days? that they might accuse him.

11And he said unto them, What man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and lift it out?

12How much then is a man better than a sheep? Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the sabbath days.

Our Lord was showing that the fourth commandment:

1) did not require fasting every sabbath
2) that it was lawful to retrieve a stranded animal on the sabbath (Exodus 23:5, Deuteronomy 22:4)
3) that He was and is "Lord"
4) that "mercy" and "necessity" were established in the fourth commandment from the beginning.

(Understand "mercy" and "necessity" are not ordinary work or recreation convenience, from our point of view)

All these things were explicit or implicit in the Old Testament teaching of the fourth commandment, yet the Pharisees had distorted that and attempted to bind men's consciences with things not in Scripture.

Our Lord observed the fourth commandment- in substance to "sabbath" (cease) and "keep holy" (set apart), and that is described in a normative way.
 
Last edited:
Can someone give me a clear and concise passage in the New testament which defines the Christian sabbath, or a command to keep it?

This is a very nice and honest question. The answer is, some commandments are given by explicit apostolic precept, or by explicit precept from Christ Himself. Others, however, are given by apostolic example. In other words, we know that the apostles were taught of Christ, and if in fact they observed a given commandment, that commandment must have come from Christ, either in the forty days they communed with him before His ascension, or by direct revelation of the Holy Ghost. In either case, however, whether the apostolic observance was by direct command in the Scriptures, or by apostolic example, nonetheless, we are duty-bound to observe it. They taught us the commandment, whether by express precept, or by apostolic example.

1 Corinthians 4.6 "Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ."

Now: in Acts 20.7, we find the following apostolic example:

"And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight."

The Greek there uses an idiomatic phrase, "the first of the Sabbaths," for "the first day of the week." The fact that the phrase is idiomatic, however, is manifested by the irregularity of gender. "First" is in the feminine gender; "sabbaths" is in the neuter gender. Thus, the phrase cannot mean "the first of the Sabbaths."

The Greek word for "day," however, is feminine: and thus, the feminine word "day" is implied. Moreover, the word "sabbaths" is often used by metonymy for "week." When the Pharisee says "I fast twice in the week," (Luke 18.12) he literally says in the Greek, "I fast twice in the sabbath." But all translations translate the phrase as "twice in the week," because they acknowledge the Greek idiom. The "week" is there described by metonomy, by the most important day of that week.

So: returning to Acts 20.7, we see that Paul gathered together with the brethren in Troas, on the first day of the week, which, the Holy Ghost tells us, was the day in which they assembled together for prayers, for the hearing of God's Word, for the singing of His praises, and for the breaking of bread.

In those early days, the disciples did nothing but what had been commanded them by the apostles through the Lord Jesus Christ. Indeed, Paul would never have allowed this worship by the disciples, except it had been commanded by Christ. This was Christ's last command to the apostles while on earth:

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Christ's express command to the disciples was that they teach the disciples to observe all things whatsoever He had commanded them.

Therefore, their assembling on the Lord's Day, the first day of the week, had to have been at the express command of Christ. Because the apostles only kept that worship which Christ commanded.

And accordingly, in Acts 20.7 and 1 Corinthians 16.7, we see that the disciples assembled for the worship of God, because thus the apostles had commanded them; and the apostles commanded it, because the Lord Jesus had thus commanded them.

Now: it is well-known that the Jewish Sabbath was a day for instruction. The Levites were commanded in the Old Testament to hold synagogue services in the communities where they dwelt, and they were to instruct the people in the Scriptures on the Lord's Day. Thus also did the schools of the prophets in Samaria during the days of Elijah and Elishah. Solemn assemblies of believers for instruction from the Word have always been commanded to be on the Sabbath day.

Thus, it follows that, if the apostles commanded the disciples to gather on the Lord's Day for the worship of God, and for the hearing of the Word, that day then must be the Christian Sabbath. It must be the day of worship as commanded by Christ, because the apostles only did that in worship which Christ commanded them.

This is the view that was universally held by the early Church, as A A Hodge proves in the following article:

Sabbath, The Day Changed: The Sabbath Preserved

I highly recommend this article.

This is it.

The idea that the Apostles did something as momentous and important as change the day of the week the Sabbath was to be kept "off their own bat" is utterly ridiculous and to be despised by those who take God's Word seriously.

Either they received a word from Christ while He was with them physically, possibly during the forty days before His Ascenscion, or they received a word from Christ by direct revelation after His Ascenscion.

The fact that we have no record of this word, doesn't make the slightest difference.

---------- Post added at 11:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:08 PM ----------

Can someone give me a clear and concise passage in the New testament which defines the Christian sabbath, or a command to keep it?

A great question. No, I can't give you a clear and concise passage in the NT which spells out the requirements of the Lord's Day. However, we must be careful. Explicit warrant for something isn't a sufficient criterion for establishing what the NT means to teach. Let me give you a couple of examples:

1. nowhere in the NT is it explicitly commanded that a woman may participate in the Lord's Supper, nor is there any historical account of a woman doing so. There is simply no "clear and concise passage" which commands or demonstrates it. However, none of us would seriously use the absence of "explicit warrant" as an argument against it. Instead, we infer from a web of theological ideas that Christian women can participate.
2.the word "love" does not appear once in the book of Acts. Does the absence of a "clear and concise" reference to God's love for the world (as in, say John 3:16) mean that the early church did not consider the Gospel message to include the concept of God's love for the world?
3. With one exception, all references in the NT to "disciples" are men. Does this mean that the church was mainly filled with male disciples?

All I'm trying to say is that explicit warrant is a poor criterion for establishing doctrine. Such is the case when deliberating on matters relating to the Lord's Day.

blessings.

Good points, all.

With the fourth commandment, we do have many explicit commands in the Old Testament. So, one would have to say the Old Testament is not connected in the same truth as the New. This kind of disconnection is commonly what a dispensational approach to Scripture does. It "cuts off" and "divides" the Word. That is not reformed theology, which is why I now understand that any minimal definition of "reformed theology" must include:

doctrines of Grace ("five points") + covenant theology + confession.

But with the fourth commandment, we have much, much more to go on even if we wrongly accept the notion that each of the ten commandments much be explicitly "re-commanded" in the New Testament to be binding today.

Jesus kept the sabbath, and that was recorded in a normative way. When challenging the Pharisees, our Lord was refuting the man-made teachings they had added to it. Often, in doing that- He referred to the Old Testament.

For example:

Matthew 12

1At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungred, and began to pluck the ears of corn and to eat.

2But when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day.

3But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him;

4How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?

5Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?

6But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple.

7But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.

8For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.

9And when he was departed thence, he went into their synagogue:

10And, behold, there was a man which had his hand withered. And they asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath days? that they might accuse him.

11And he said unto them, What man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and lift it out?

12How much then is a man better than a sheep? Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the sabbath days.

Our Lord was showing that the fourth commandment:

1) did not require fasting every sabbath
2) that it was lawful to retrieve a stranded animal on the sabbath (Exodus 23:5, Deuteronomy 22:4)
3) that He was and is "Lord"
4) that "mercy" and "necessity" were established in the fourth commandment from the beginning.

(Understand "mercy" and "necessity" are not ordinary work or recreation convenience, from our point of view)

All these things were explicit or implicit in the Old Testament teaching of the fourth commandment, yet the Pharisees had distorted that and attempted to bind men's consciences with things not in Scripture.

Our Lord observed the fourth commandment- in substance to "sabbath" (cease) and "keep holy" (set apart), and that is described in a normative way.

Very good.

It's interesting to note also that there is plenty teaching by our Lord in the Gospels by example and word on the weekly Sabbath, while there is little or nothing on the other purely Jewish ceremonial holy days with which the dispensationalists and others tend to lump the Sabbath.

Of all dispensationalism's deleterious effects, the weakening of the Fourth Commandment in the eyes of evangelicals must rank as the most serious.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top