Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistInCrisis  Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilgrim Quote:
Originally Posted by BaptistInCrisis
Chris, I've been on both ends of the spectrum. When I was a student at the Word of Life Bible Institute (a very good Arminian school), the Lord's Day was taken seriously. We had worship in the morning, lunch, an afternoon of rest (where we were encouraged to read the word, fellowship and pray), evening meal followed by another worship service. Recreation was not allowed and demerits were assessed for those who broke this rule. This from an Arminian school who would staunchly deny keeping the sabbath. I concur that there is a loose and watered down evangelicalism that treats the Lord's Day as just another day. But there are many churches that, while not Calvinistic or sabbatarian, still view the Lord's Day as sacred and separate from the other six days.
| Indeed, but those churches plus the Reformed sabbath keeping churches are a distinct minority today compared to those who see Sunday as just another day and who go to church that day merely because it is the traditional day to do so. | Chris, so what do you make of a church that claims not to be sabbatarian yet treats the day as sacred (like the example I gave of Word of Life)? What would you call a church like that? How would you label them? |
A happy inconsistency. Better a church that denies the Sabbath in theory but keeps it in practice than one that subscribes to a Sabbatarian confession but denies it with its actions.
But my sense also is that if they think they have no grounds for keeping the Sabbath, what will the next generation do since it would seem they merely keep it out of tradition or pragmatism? (What other grounds would there be for those who reject exegetical ones?)