I really do have to run somewhere. The point is that there have been a list of do's and dont's but given to guide us to maturity so that we don't decieve ourselves to think that we're fulfilling the law of love by doing something that God doesn't love. If God delights in us consecrating one day in seven to Him in worship and resting from our activities then we can either view that as a list of do's and don'ts or we can view that as something that is the reasonable thing to do for the One you love and were redeemed by.

I inherently understand why much of the view is interpreted as a set of rules and I also think that part of the problem is that, just because you grow up a Sabbatarian doesn't mean that you're always doing so because you delight in the Lord. Even the Sabbath can be celebrated hypocritically as something that you're a better person for unlike those other wicked people. I think we ought to strike the concern out of our mind how the concept is packaged at times and reflect more on what our goal is. I'm not saying this as a person who thinks he sanctifies the Day as perfectly as he ought but my happiest days have been the days where sunup to sundown I was in the presence of the people of God either in worship or fellowship talking about the things of the Lord. I can assure you that it did not feel like toil.

__________________
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?

Ok, since Rich has to run I'll ask this of any(every) one.

I've seen women here ask if it's permissible to cook a meal for their family on Sunday. I've seen someone ask if answering the phone is. Again, if we didn't have the biblical example of the followers of Christ picking grain as they walked with him and Christ allowing it, don't you think it's possible that many here would disapprove?

If I logged in on Sunday and said I just gotten back from a walk with my friends where along the way we picked some vegetables and ate them, I think it's very possible that someone would think (and maybe even say so in a post) that doing so was sin on the sabbath.

Am I wrong?

__________________


http://www.myspace.com/aleavelle
"Speak wisdom to a fool and he'll think you have no sense at all"

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

In Romans 13, we are told love is the fulfilling of the law. In Christ we are free from the penalty of the law as Jesus has paid for our sins against the law of God. The law is good if a man use it lawfully.
Post 18 was very helpful on this.
In the Nt. we are told that God was going to put the law in our heart. I do not think that it means our heart is burdened by law ,or law keeping.
What did the psalmist mean in Psalm 119:

18Open thou mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of thy law.
34Give me understanding, and I shall keep thy law; yea, I shall observe it with my whole heart.
113I hate vain thoughts: but thy law do I love.

Some try to imply that only 9 commandments were mentioned in the New Covenant.
Were only 9 commandments placed inside the ark of the covenant?
In Romans 2:14-15
14For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

15Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another

What law is going to judge the unsaved gentiles, at the white throne? What law is on their conscience? Do you think it might be the ten commandments/or only 9?

Years ago I asked Pastor Chantry about the law and the gospel. He pointed out that central to the gospel message is the fact that the Lord Jesus kept the law perfectly,delighting to do the Father's will [even the sabbath observance]. It was His sinless life and law keeping that is put to our account, along with the payment in full of our sin debt that provides the necessary propitiation for us. Without any part of it,we do not see heaven.
Law keeping is at the heart of the gospel, and also this from Solomon:

13Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.

14For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.



Walter Chantry wrote a book called Call the Sabbath a Delight. It might be helpful to work through.

__________________
Anthony D'Arienzo
Sunday School Teacher
Hope Reformed Baptist Church:
Medford, N.Y.

I think you're wrong to primarily worry about how others will view the way you view the Sabbath. Incidentally, there is a spirit of strict Sabbatarianism that views their role as primarily being Reformed "hall monitors". I think a person's view and observance of the Sabbath and other such issues is best handled in a Pastoral setting because the kinds of concerns you have are meant to be handled in the setting where growth in Grace is primarily supposed to occur.

I don't think that simply because people are strict in their observance of the Sabbath that they will necessarily be mature in how they deal with others who have not come to that conclusion. I'm not arguing that there ought not be a concern but an "obey the Law you sinner!" attitude is not really the way to go here. It reveals that the attitude is more about how the offender is breaching what they expect about them and less about whether they have compassionate concern for those that still need to grow in many ways to include the Sabbath. I would hope that if a new Christian came into one of these Churches that they would want to mature such a man in the Gospel and not immediately hammer them the way they hammer others here and be more forebearing of their immaturity in such areas.

Ideally, those who are seeking to obey the Lord out of their overflowing gratitude and love for Him would be holding out the delight to others that they have. "Come, join us for the Law is our delight...." Should not the person who is demonstrating maturity in this area be humble and servant of all and seeking the edification of the immature? It might reveal in some cases that those that think they are mature in such things still don't realize that things aren't well in the Church just because they are mature if they're not willing to also build up the weak with their good in mind.

I can go around and around on this. The bottom line for me is that the Sabbath is holy. Its proponents are not always so holy because some of them are still themselves learning how to truly delight in everything: not only how they love the Lord in their observance of the Sabbath but how they love their neighbor and bear with his weaknesses, stubbornness, and immaturity. It really does help to be in fellowship with each other where such issues have to be worked out on the ground.

Two points of distinction need to occur in this discussion.

[1] Chris is surely correct: Westminster / Puritan theology is Sabbatarian. It was a huge issue for the Puritans ever since Richard Greenham took up the issue, and Nicholas Bownde (his son-in-law) published on it (in the late 16th century). This is surely an undisputed point and should not be questioned.

[2] However, the reformed tradition generally cannot be described as Sabbatarian. If we judge the reformed tradition according to all the confessions, we find them coming to different conclusions (as we find various reformed theologians coming to different conclusions on this matter).

Thus, WCF / Puritan Sabbatarianism is a subset of the reformed tradition. One doesn't have to be Sabbatarian to be reformed, but they're strictly not within the Puritan tradition.

The problem I have with this statement, is that the 4th commandment (as given at Sinai) explicitly states that the Sabbath must be on the 7th day, or Saturday. Hence, unless we're 7th-day adventists (or baptists) then we can't affirm that the 4th commandment is perpetually binding because it's undergone some sort of transformation since Christ, even for the WCF / Puritan types (who now believe the Sabbath is on Sunday).

Every blessing.

__________________
Marty

From Creation to New Creation via Redemption

I'm not interesting in debating this point. It's off topic. It is the Confessional view of the Scriptures that the actual day of the Sabbath was not the principle that was perpetual as much as the principle that one day in seven be consecrated. We have Apostolic testimony to the change in this in light of this fact. It is also noted by Puritans that Christ "worked" redemption on the Jewish Sabbath (was still in the grave) and rose again on the Lord's Day for our salvation.

As I said, however, this is off topic. If you're not even convinced that the Lord's Day needs to be consecrated then it's an interesting opinion but not something I'm interested in discussing in this thread.

Dear Rich,

Thanks for your response. I really don't want to be a pain here, but I'm not sure I understand why this is "off topic"--aren't we discussing the liberty of Sabbath keeping? If we are, then how the Sabbath commandment relates to the New Covenant surely is critical to the discussion.

For what it's worth I believe that one day in seven is for rest. However, I don't arrive there from the 4th commandment alone. And again, I'm not sure you appreciate that the fourth commandment isn't teaching the principle of one day off in seven, it's teaching that the the seventh day (Saturday) and not any other day is a Sabbath for Israel. This may be a subset of a general principle, but that general principle is not articulated in the 4th commandment itself. We must go beyond it. This is critical in understanding how the Torah relates to the New Covenant, which is at the heart of our discussion.

Hence, I don't think we can start with the 4th commandment and argue for liberty / non-liberty of the Sabbath. Rather, we start at creation, go through Cain and Abel, onto the command to rest from collecting manna (before the Torah was given), through the 10 words given at Sinai, and into Christ's statement that "the Sabbath was made for humanity (anthropos -- not just Israel)" and not vice-versa.

Every blessing dear brother,

Marty.

From what I know of the opposite position, those who deny the abiding validity of the Sabbath would (generally) say that attendance at public worship on the Lord's Day - which they would consider as part of observing Sunday - is not a matter of Christian Liberty but is obligatory on all believers.

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

It's off topic because it's too much for one thread to unpack. Also, I'm not aware of any Reformed Confessions that agree with your view that the Law of God taught that the Sabbath is constricted to Saturday. The command is to labor for six days and to rest on the seventh. Reformed Commmentators, in light of the New Covenant, have seen this as still perpetual but that the 6 days of labor follow the rest we celebrate now on the Lord's Day. Here is what the Heidelberg states:
I would also note that the Heidelberg in Question 92 also lists the fourth commandment as part of the Law of God. Under What is the Law of God and not what was the Law of God.

Dear Brethren,

Is the argument somewhat opaque to this point because we are not agreed on fundamentals? What I mean by that is, should we first not be looking at what "Christian Liberty" consists of and go from there, rather than argue about the color of one another's dogs while some are referring to their cats and some their horses?

Rev. Bacon from the Faith Presbyterian Church Reformed in Texas has an incredibly thorough series on Christian Liberty (a 25-part series!) available on sermonaudio.com Rev. vanderZwaag from the HNRC covers the same in a more basic form (one sermon or so). I don't have the exact link to Rev. v.d. Zwaag's sermon, sorry - it is on sermonaudio.com as well. I do have the link to Rev. Bacon's series, below. I'm not entirely through it yet, but I have the best of intentions (!)...

SermonAudio.com - Search Results

BTW, they are both of the opinion that it is 'freedom from' certain sinful burdens/worldly conventions, not 'freedom to' do what we please. From the way this discussion has been developing, taking such a viewpoint as the basis for the argument would change the slant of things significantly.

__________________
Kevin
Far East
Deacon, Int'l Church

Kevin,

It is a good point. I think part of the point of this thread is to unpack that point a bit. I've been trying to explain what we are set free from in order that we might be free to obey.

I think that's a fundamental underpinning to this argument that needs to be fleshed out and come to consensus upon in order to proceed profitably.

Regarding Christian Liberty,

I think there are actually several kinds of 'christian liberty' mentioned in the bible. There is liberty from the bondage of sin, liberty from keeping the law as a requirement for salvation, and liberty from manmade religious rules.

However, I think the bible also speaks of another kind of christian liberty about which it would not be entirely wrong to say we are free to do 'as we please.' The bible does tell us we are bound only by what God has commanded or forbidden in his word. There is freedom in those other areas that God has not regulated. Hence, in regard to meat offered to idols, Paul told the Corinthians that since God did not consider eating such meat a sin, there were free to do as they pleased with regards to it. Now, that freedom was to be curtailed when it would offend a brother or bring disrepute upon the gospel, but it was a freedom nevertheless.

I think it is this kind of 'liberty' that most non-sabbatarians mean when they evoke the name of christian liberty in regards to the sabbath. From their perspective there is 'liberty' regarding following the Sabbath because the Sabbath laws, as contained in the OT are not binding on the NT church.

__________________
Mark Li
International University Church
New South Wales, Australia

CH, the use of the word "libertine" in the context of one who does not observe a WCF prescribed sabbath rest is not proper at all. And to compare one as such to Bundy or this crucifix lawn ornament is inflammatory. I find it problematic that you offer an apology to Bob V for spaming a sports thread, yet continue to use malicious words in the "proper" forum...

__________________
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."

NO

When Christians honored the Sabbath in this land the entire country and Christ's Church was better for it. Christians have lost their testimony to the world because of their neglect of the 4th commandment. It's nonsense to preach to unbelievers that Christians are separate and holy from the world while using the Lord's Day to fulfill worldly pleasures. To my shame, I've been in both positions.

No, we are not free from God's commandments. Additionally, God's commandments are not burdensome or grievous to Christians.

I John 5:2-3

2By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.
3For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

******

Question: What does "...resting in Christ" mean? I've heard it many times before as a response to Sabbatarians. In fact I used to parrot it as a newborn Christian at your local Evanjelly meeting on the corner. In my mind it meant "We [Christians] are not the Nation of Israel so we are not bound to observe this commandment as it was meant for just them..." I've asked this question to the PB in the past but never received an explanation (it may have been buried under Today's Posts. )

So, "resting in Christ":

-What is this doctrine?
-How or what do we do?
-Was this taught / is this found in early Christian doctrine?
-How does this relate to the Sabbath that was established before the Law? Were those saints resting in Christ?

__________________
Chris Mangum
Presbyterian Reformed Church of Charlotte
student, GPTS
.357 Mangum

Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world. James 1:27

A plug or two. Much of this is of course simply stating that there remains a debate over whether the Puritan/Presbyterian tradition is correct on the nature of the fourth commandment; however, in the Reformed tradition going back to Calvin, the observance of the day was for all practical purposes "Puritan" if I can be anachronistic. One only need look at Calvin's sermons on Deuteronomy. I cover much of the literature in my Calvin in the Hands of the Philistines article; also I highly commend/recommend/thumbs up Woody Lauer's entry in the 2007 issue of The Confessional Presbyterian, John Calvin, the Nascent Sabbatarian: A Reconsideration of Calvin’s View of Two Key Sabbath-Issues, which was first published in Japanese, and this is the first English printing.

PS. I have much of Bownd's work on the fourth commandment worked up to publish but it has been a back burner project due to difficulties.

__________________
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?