Without entering into this debate right now, let me just remind you of Romans 14. This might be an issue of the weak vs. the strong or it could be an issue of using liberty for license.

In the best case scenario, both parties are supposed to be willing to suffer the other for the sake of unity and edification. That said, those who believe they have liberty to watch football on Sundays in the freedom of their consciences ought to be content to do so for the Lord and they do not need to go into a board to participate in open discussions on a topic that others who have personal scruple may be offended by. The "both and" aspect of Romans 14 is that football is not something that is worth tearing your brother down over and the goal from both parties ought to be mutual edification.

Those who feel their liberty allows them freedom to speak of such subjects on the Lord's Day could easily do so privately without tearing down your brothers around you who are bothered by it. The solution Paul offers to the parties in Romans 14 is not that they simply flaunt their liberty and tell the other party to "get over it...."

Hence, I would suggest that these discussions are best participated in on other days out of consideration for those around you who are offended by them as the goal of their edification ought to be greater than your desire to talk about football.

Likewise, in our reminder to others about such things that we have scruples in, we all need to be careful that the goal of our reminder is their edification in these matters. We all have one Master who will judge every intention of the heart.

I did not detect overt malice from either party but I simply want to make sure the goal is noted here.

__________________
Rich
Okinawa, Japan

WebsiteMaven - Web Hosting Reviews, Guides, and Advice to build and promote your web site.
SoliDeoGloria.com - A Community for Reformed Thought and Discussion

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

Hi:

I think Rich Leino brings up a good point. So I would like to ask:

Is the observance of Sunday a matter of Christian Liberty?

To those who may say "yes" I would like to ask if the whole of the 10 Commands are subject to Christian Liberty? How then would you justify a person committing Adultery or Perjury or Murder when you say that the 10 Commandments are subject to Christian Liberty?

If you define your Christian Liberty on Sunday as "doing whatever I want" - which directly contradicts the 4th Command - then how can you condemn someone else who violates a different command out of the pretext of "Christian Liberty"?

I believe that the book of James says somewhere that if you violate one of these commands it is as if you violated all of them.

I once heard a preacher say that he wishes his congregation was as excited about worshipping God as they are watching their favorite Football team score a touchdown.

It makes one wonder....

Blessings,

-CH

__________________
In Essentials Unity, in non-Essentials Liberty, in all things Charity.

Robert Paul Wieland
Springs Reformed Presbyterian Church
Colorado Springs, CO
RPCNA

Can these posts be shifted to a new thread; the subject of the Sabbath and Christian Liberty would be an interesting one to discuss in more detail.

In fairness to non-Sabbath people, they would probably argue that the Sabbath command is one that we don't have to keep due to additional revelation in the New Testament. Therefore, they would not say that adultery, idolatry etc are matters of Christian Liberty. While this is not a position I hold, it is important to try to understand precisely where Christians with whom we disagree are coming from.

__________________
Daniel Ritchie
Saintfield, Northern Ireland - Queen's University, Belfast:History/Politics
Member of Dromara Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland (Covenanter)

We've discussed this before but now we have some new faces, some young guns, new old curmudgeons and a guy who is pretty good with a bo staff, so let's debate this. I'm moving posts from another thread to kick things off. Blessings, let's have a clean fight and no hitting below the belt. (Sorry, anymore sport's metaphors and I'll have to put this back in the sports forum.)

__________________
Bob Vigneault (Bawb Vēēn-yo)
I just know there's got to be a pony in here somewhere!

The Heartbeat of Heaven (blog) MySpace (Music), MySpace (Personal)
Member of Christ Presbyterian Church, Janesville, WI OPC www.christ-opc.org

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

This has been my question also for those who take the 'Christian liberty' route. Some just outright argue that there are now only 9 commandments. I don't agree, but that seems to be a more 'consistent' argument.

__________________

How did you know this about me Bob?

__________________
N. Robert; Trinity Reformed Church RCA, Holland MI

Once in a while you can get shown the light, in the strangest of places if you look at it right."

My understanding is that the classical dispensational hermeneutic is that the other 9 commandments were reiterated in the NT but that the 4th wasn't.

__________________
Chris Poe--Attending Grace Community Baptist Church, Mandeville, LA

"There never was a man in the world without a creed. What is a creed? A creed is what you believe. What is a confession? It is a declaration of what you believe. That declaration may be oral or it may be committed to writing, but the creed is there either expressed or implied."—B.H. Carroll

According to what non-Sabbath people say, where in the New Testament does it teach that we don't have to keep the Sabbath command any longer?

__________________
Curt Hayashida
member, Community Bible Church (Non-denominational)
Vallejo, CA

Sorry to say this folks but, "Here we go again." (sigh)

__________________
Donald Jacobs
Marysville. WA
Cascade Church (CRCNA)

Cum vero infirmor tunc potens sum.

They would appeal to passages such as Romans 14 and Colossians 2:16 in support of the idea that the Sabbath is no longer obligatory.

Incidentally, my post was originally attached to another thread where the context was not to promote the idea that all elements of the Christian Sabbath were a matter of Christian liberty. There are certainly some aspects of the Sabbath that are unquestionably not a matter of liberty such as the command to assemble and worship.

I think the more interesting question would be what aspects are a matter of liberty. Surely there is some room for extremely strict Sabbath observance that can be celebrated to the Lord while others may have the liberty not to be so scrupulous. For instance, some may not want to do any cooking or may not even want to turn on an oven while others might not be so scrupulous.

My main concern in the OP was to demonstrate to those that "had a problem" with others view is that neither party has a "right" to judge the other party. If a man is going to have to answer for not obeying the Lord then he'll answer to the Lord and not to us. The goal of either party ought to be the edification of the other. Even strict Sabbatarians ought to be concerned for the edificaiton of those that they feel are using liberty for license and seeking their edification in the tone they use and the desire they have that all might delight in the things of the Lord. Additionally, those that are convinced they are honoring the Sabbath in activities and discussions that others would be stung in conscience by ought not to despise the scrupulous and respect that, they too, obey as unto the Lord.

Good points, Rich.

However, couldn't an argument be made that one cannot keep the command to assemble and worship unless he keeps one day in seven holy? In order to regularly assemble and worship, a group of believers, by necessity, must set apart a day in which to do just that.

Absolutely. I think the Lord's Day is hallowed. Again, it's not a matter of whether it is holy but I think there can be proper reverance for the Sabbath among two believers while one is more scrupulous about how that reverance is observed. There can also be those that use liberty as an opportunity for license. In the former case, the over-scrupulous should be content to observe the Sabbath as their conscience demands and, if they don't want to use ovens then be content, but don't despise a brother who does not. It can then become very tricky to start stripping away where the scruples end and determining a "line" beyond which a person is not really observing the Sabbath.

I don't think we're supposed to be "measuring" each other this way. If our goal is the maturing of others in all things, including the Sabbath, then it's not to make them "like me" but to ensure that their hearts are ever more tender to the things of God so that any desire they have to make the Sabbath holy flows out of a delight in their heart to do so and not that "so and so" will disapprove of me if I do not.

We (Westminster/Puritan Sabbatarians*) should not however give folks occasion to stumble, even when they think they are not; that is why I try to close NP and CPJ online shopping from Saturday night through Monday AMs.

*Honestly, Westminster/Puritan theology IS Sabbatarianism, it is so prominent.

__________________
Chris Coldwell
Lakewood Presbyterian Church (PCA), Member
• Naphtali Press: Presbyterian & Reformed Books
• The Confessional Presbyterian, A Journal for Discussion of Presbyterian Doctrine & Practice
• The Blue Banner Archive

When heresy rises in an evangelical body, it is never frank and open. It always begins by skulking, and assuming a disguise. Its advocates, when together, boast of great improvements, and congratulate one another on having gone greatly beyond the ‘old dead orthodoxy,’ and on having left behind many of its antiquated errors: but when taxed with deviations from the received faith, they complain of the unreasonableness of their accusers, as they ‘differ from it only in words.’ This has been the standing course of errorists ever since the apostolic age. Samuel Miller, Introductory essay, The Articles of the Synod of Dort (1841).

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

I think it would depend on your definition of 'Sabbatarian' as well. Those who do not keep the 4th tend to refer to 'Sabbatarians' as those that Rich describes who want to conform everyone to their scruples as to *how* one keeps the day holy. (with a negative conotation) While those who hold to the beliefs of the Puritans tend to refer to themselves as 'Sabbatarians' as those who desire a day free of the cares of the world to rest and worship. (with a positive conotation)

In Baker's Theological Dictionary 'Sabbatarianism' is likened to Constantines regulation against Sunday's labor in 321. If that is the definition of 'Sabbatarian', then I am not one. If 'Sabbatarian' is defined as one who loves to rest and worship, then I am one.

The Westminster Confession and Catechisms are my definition; and the boards I think. If not, then maybe I'm in the wrong universe?

I would like to know the criteria to a flawless observance of the sabbath, do you control your daydreams, sneak a peak into the upcoming week's schedule, pick up the funnies in a newspaper, write thank you cards, spank your kids for fighting, practice playing catch with your son, potty train the dog, are all of these things sinful on the sabbath? I think not, and since the law stands as an unsatisfiable task that we must rest in Christ to fulfill I don't see how partaking of recreational activities on our designated day of rest is not pleasing to God since it is a day of rest and we can be thankful for little pleasantries such as sports. I'm not saying make an idol of the Dallas Cowboys, I just enjoy watching them and rooting them on, I go to church on Sundays as well.

Corporate worship and a day of rest are satisfied.

__________________

Travis Speegle
Redeemer Presbyterian, PCA (Waco, Tx)
Pacific Cross Roads, PCA (Los Angeles, CA)


"When it comes to trustworthy theologians one can usually honor the rule of thumb that the deader the better."-Dr. John Hannah, DTS (of all places)

I always take this to be a problem of approach. If we view the Sabbath as a list of "don'ts", we will have a bad time of it.

But if we focus on the dos, it is much easier. Do worship, do rest, do meditate on God and his creation, do read edifying materials, do enjoy simple pleasures of fellowshipping with God's people, do help those in need, etc.

If you fill your day with the positives, the negatives are forgotten and not nagging on your conscience. The Puritans were all about discipline, but we often forget that they took pleasure not in self-negation, but in positive action and reflection.

It's sort of like aiming a rifle. If you concentrate on what you are not supposed to shoot at, you'll have a hard time hitting the target.

__________________
R.Vic Bottomly
Providence Reformed Baptist Church, Tacoma, WA

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?