What Day is the Sabbath?

Status
Not open for further replies.
That's a very good observation Brett. They definitely pre-date Constantine but as I survey the Fathers I'm still seeing a reaction against Judaism (some pretty intense) instead of any reference to a specific proclamation of the apostles. The writings of the Fathers are not really doctrinal training but rather a record of how early Christians worshipped.

It's assumed that there must have been a precedent set by the apostles, but wouldn't an overturning of a creation ordinance call for a specific teaching from scripture? Would the Holy Spirit leave us to base our observation of Sunday as the sabbath to an assumption.

Furthermore, would an apostle have the authority to change a creation ordinance in the first place? God declared it holy, Peter might have said that it isn't anymore. That's shakey ground. I could accept the change if it had been recorded in Holy writ by an inspired writer with close apostolic connection.

When we protested against the mother church we took a good hard look at our traditions and measured them against scripture. I appreciate that the Seventh Day Baptists and others kept looking and dared to go against the economy and tradition to recognize that the sabbath had been changed without the authority to do so.

Unfortunately, seventh day sabbath keepers share their convictions with many who could be described as cults. That casts our argument into suspicion from the start.

I'm not trying to convert anyone, I'm just trying to share the wonderful gift of the sabbath.
 
Fred,
"consistently to worship" might be a bit of isogesis regarding those four verses. I see 'first day' in each verse but I don't see that it was specifically to worship. Very respectfully,
Bob
 
[quote:addc2ba66b]
There were Messianic Jews in the churches. Let me challenge all you pastors who post here....WHERE IS YOUR JEW?
[/quote:addc2ba66b]

My Jew is sitting at the right hand of God the Father Almighty. And just like Kinky Friedman sang "They Don't Make Jews Like Jesus Anymore". :yes:
 
-Brain fart.


I conclude that I agree with Fred (after thinking this through thoroughly) that the sabbath day was Saturday and is now The lords day. I stand on the 1 day in 7 principle.

End of post

[Edited on 4-7-2004 by Scott Bushey]
 
[quote:a528bca9b3][i:a528bca9b3]Originally posted by maxdetail[/i:a528bca9b3]
That's a very good observation Brett. They definitely pre-date Constantine but as I survey the Fathers I'm still seeing a reaction against Judaism (some pretty intense) instead of any reference to a specific proclamation of the apostles. The writings of the Fathers are not really doctrinal training but rather a record of how early Christians worshipped.
[/quote:a528bca9b3]

The problem is that the ECF's believing that Sunday was the Christian Sabbath refutes any notion that Constatine 'changed' it. He only institued what was already practiced.
 
[quote:c411fcc0b7][i:c411fcc0b7]Originally posted by maxdetail[/i:c411fcc0b7]
It doesn't surprise me that in it's arrogance it overturned the Sabbath by changing the day. It's not even a 4th commandment issue. The 4th commandment tells us to remember the Sabbath to keep it holy. The Sabbath is a creation ordinance. It was declared holy at creation and I don't recognize anyone in the church with enough authority to overturn a creation ordinance. Only Christ, the Lord of the Sabbath, could have done it and he didn't. [/quote:c411fcc0b7]
If Christ (or the Spirit) did not change the Sabbath to the first day, then why did the apostles practice it? Not only do we see this practice from the verses Fred quoted, but we also have the testimony of the early church, who by the way did not teach celibacy, or the Mass yet until much later. The apostles could not change something so significant without divine sanction.
 
Question for those not holding to a new covenant Sabbath: What do you do with the Sabbath of OT prophecy (Ezek. 44:24; Is. 56:1ff.)? Seems to me that if you are dispensational, you could put it in the millennium. Would it be the seventh day of the week? What would be its purpose? Would it look forward, backward, ...? If so, forward to what or backward to what? Would it be the sign of the Old Covenant? And how is this established exegetically? If you are not Dispensational and not an inter-advental Sabbatarian, what do you do with it?

Here's how I see it from something I wrote some time ago: The section of the book of Isaiah starting at chapter 40 and ending with chapter 66 is pointing forward to the days of Messiah and in some places to the eternal state. The section includes prophetic language pointing forward to the time primarily between the two comings of Christ, the interadvental days of the New Covenant. It is understood this way by the New Testament in several places (see Matthew 3:3; 8:16, 17; 12:15-21; and Acts 13:34). Isaiah 56:1-8 speaks prophetically of a day in redemptive history in which God will save Gentiles (see especially verses 7 and 8). The language of "all nations" in verse 7 reminds us of the promise given to Abraham concerning blessing all nations through his seed (see Genesis 12:3 and Galatians 3:8, 16). This Abrahamic promise is pursued by the great commission of Matthew 28:18-20. In several New Testament texts the language of Isaiah 56:1-8 is applied to the days between Christ's first and second coming in the motif of fulfillment (See Matthew 21:12, 13, Acts 8:26-40, Ephesians 2:19 and First Timothy 3:15. Compare Matthew 21:13 with Isaiah 56:7. Compare also Acts 8:26-40 [notice a eunuch was reading from Isaiah] with Isaiah 56:3-5 [see also Deuteronomy 23:1 and Leviticus 22:24 for Old Covenant restrictions on eunuchs]; and Ephesians 2:19 [household of God] and First Timothy 3:15 [house of God-The context of this verse includes First Timothy 2:1-7, where Paul outlines regulations for church prayer.] with Isaiah 56:7).

With these considerations before us, it seems not only plausible but compelling to conclude that between the two advents of Christ, when the Old Covenant law restricting eunuchs no longer restricts them, and when the nations are becoming the Lord's and frequenting his house, which is his Church, a Sabbath (see Isaiah 56:2, 4, 6) yet remains. The English Puritan, John Bunyan, commenting on Isaiah 56 said, "Also it follows from hence, that the sabbath that has a promise annexed to the keeping of it, is rather that which the Lord Jesus shall give to the churches of the Gentiles." (John Bunyan, The Works of John Bunyan, Volume Two, [Carlisle, PA, The Banner of Truth Trust, 1991], 361.) This means the fourth commandment of the Decalogue has moral and practical relevance for the Christian according to Old Testament prophecy (see also Isaiah 58:13, 14 and Joseph A. Pipa, The Lord's Day, [Fearn, Scotland, Christian Focus Publications, 1997], 14-16 for a brief attempt to place Isaiah's prophecy in the context of the New Covenant.) It is of vital importance to realize that the Old Testament clearly prophesies the abrogation of the Old Covenant Sabbaths in Hosea 2:11. There is evidence from Hosea 2, Isaiah 22, and in the New Testament that Hosea's prophecy is speaking of New Covenant days. First, the phrase "in that day" in verses 16, 18 and 21 is used prophetically of New Covenant days in Isaiah 22:20. This is proven by the fact that Revelation 3:7 quotes Isaiah 22:22 and applies it to Christ. Second, Paul's use of Hosea 1:10 and 2:23 in Romans 9:25 confirms that Hosea was referring to New Covenant days. Third, Peter's use of the language of Hosea 1:9, 10 and 2:23 in 1 Peter 2:10 suggests this as well. According to the New Testament, Hosea's prophecy finds its fulfillment when God brings the Gentiles into a saving relationship along with the Jews. This is one of the distinctives of New Covenant days. Not only is there Old Testament prophecy which speaks of the abrogation of the Old Covenant Sabbaths under the New Covenant, there is explicit New Testament fulfillment in Col. 2:16. Therefore, there is a way in which the Sabbath is abrogated because fulfilled and a way in which it is still morally binding on the Christian because it administrates perpetual Moral Law as summarized in the Decalogue. The Decalogue is considered to be a unit under the Old Covenant and as prophesied by Jeremiah (Jer. 31:33) as it relates to the New Covenant. What we have in Isaiah's prophecy is one commandment of the Decalogue, the fourth, finding its practical relevance under the New Covenant. Since the Decalogue is a unit, then if the fourth commandment is relevant under the New Covenant, so must be the whole of the Decalogue.
 
[quote:07c70f3b44]
(see also Isaiah 58:13, 14 and Joseph A. Pipa, The Lord's Day, [Fearn, Scotland, Christian Focus Publications, 1997], 14-16 for a brief attempt to place Isaiah's prophecy in the context of the New Covenant.)
[/quote:07c70f3b44]

The above book should be a first read for those who are dealing with these issues. Next I would recommend Edward's 4 sermons, then Daniel Willson's book "The Lord's Day" and then you can get into the heavey hitters (Gillifan, Shepherd, Owen, etc.).

Rich said:
[quote:07c70f3b44]
What we have in Isaiah's prophecy is one commandment of the Decalogue, the fourth, finding its practical relevance under the New Covenant. Since the Decalogue is a unit, then if the fourth commandment is relevant under the New Covenant, so must be [b:07c70f3b44]the whole of the Decalogue.[/b:07c70f3b44]
[/quote:07c70f3b44]

This is key. NCT, Dispensationalists and everyone not yet satisfied with God's Law ought to think through this.
 
Matthew is correct, Pipa's book is the best initial treatment available. It is exegetical without the disadvantages of being unsystematic (like many "exegetical" works), practical and straightforward.

Also good is Bruce Ray's [i:0bd09894f7]Celebrating the Sabbath[/i:0bd09894f7], Chantry's book [i:0bd09894f7]Call the Sabbath a Delight[/i:0bd09894f7] and Dennison's [i:0bd09894f7]Market Day of the Soul[/i:0bd09894f7].

The key is that moral laws can (and do) have positive aspects to them. The Sabbath principle of 1 day in 7 is a moral command. In the beginning, God annexed a positive command (which is to be obeyed completely, but is not inherent in the nature of the command, as the moral aspect is) to the moral command and designated the 7th day as the Sabbath. But after the resurrection of Christ, God changed the day (notice that God changed it, not man - Calvin IS wrong here) to the 1st day of the week. (viz. WCF 21.7)

[b:0bd09894f7]The reason?[/b:0bd09894f7] The 7th day Sabbath commemorated God's creation and looked [u:0bd09894f7]forward[/u:0bd09894f7] to completion of the work of redemption - God pictured the redemption that He would provide for man. The 1st day Sabbath commemorated the completion of that work by Christ.

There are indeed other examples of such moral laws that have positive commandments attached to them that are mutable (in their [u:0bd09894f7]positive[/u:0bd09894f7], but not [u:0bd09894f7]moral[/u:0bd09894f7] aspect): the 7th commandment as it contains marriage. God instituted marriage as a creation ordinance, and there is no abrogation of that command. To forbid to marry is a sin, and to have relations outside of marriage is a sin. But God has changed the cosanguinity of marriage (how close relatives can marry) . No one would argue that either God meant to permit siblings to marry (as was obviously the case in Adam's children, and in Abraham's case as well) or that the marriage command is null and void. But that is what we are told concerning the Sabbath.

The problem is that a 7th day Sabbath is Judaizing. The Puritans recognized this. It is to (implicitly) deny the change in creation (recreation) that Christ wrought. Max, I would say, respectfully, that is no coincidence that only a minuscule number of Christians hold to a 7th day Sabbath. i would also say that it is not conincidence (respectfully) that those who do tend to be Jewish in background or mindset (in more than with respect to the Sabbath) like Bee. It is a holding onto the old when the new is come. It is no coincidence that the 7th day Sabbath is THE main plank in many legalistic cults like Adventism. This works principle is simply one of many.

I strongly suggest that you read Pipa, and then Owen.
 
The course of the moon in it's phases is not exactly 28 days, it seems to me. In fact, it is 29.5 days. The Jewish nation counted the months by the new moon, always starting on the first day of the week. Thus it seems logical to assume that somewhere along the line they lost track of which day of the week commomorated the seventh day of creation. Nor are we at all instructed concerning that after the flood. There seems to be no continuity of the creation seventh day, just of the seventh day of each week which started on a Sunday every time, since the Julian calendar.

The week days as we know it come from the Julian calendar, not the Jewish observances. Which day constitues the first day of the week is completely arbitrary anymore. Why not change the calendar to show Sunday as the seventh day? Won't we be statisfying both the OT and NT that way? We already have a secular calendar which does this, since Sat. and Sun. are both regarded as part of the same weekend. We know that it was a Sunday when Jesus rose from the dead, and which day of the week we observe it doesn't matter any more, as long as it's the Lord's Day.

But this is why I think that the abolishing of the ceremonial observances also changed the Sabbath to the first day of the week, which was just another term for what we know as Sunday.
:wr50:

[Edited on 4-8-2004 by JohnV]
 
[b:24bd9a4366]Romans 14[/b:24bd9a4366]
1 Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things. 2For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables. 3Let not him who eats despise him who does not eat, and let not him who does not eat judge him who eats; for God has received him. 4Who are you to judge another's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. Indeed, he will be made to stand, for God is able to make him stand. [u:24bd9a4366]5One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. 6He who observes the day, observes it to the Lord; and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it[/u:24bd9a4366]. He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he who does not eat, to the Lord he does not eat, and gives God thanks. 7For none of us lives to himself, and no one dies to himself. 8For if we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. Therefore, whether we live or die, we are the Lord's. 9For to this end Christ died and rose and lived again, that He might be Lord of both the dead and the living. 10But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. 11For it is written: "As I live, says the LORD, every knee shall bow to Me, and every tongue shall confess to God." [u:24bd9a4366]12So then each of us shall give account of himself to God. 13Therefore let us not judge one another anymore[/u:24bd9a4366], but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother's way.
 
[quote:1762dbc29d][i:1762dbc29d]Originally posted by pastorway[/i:1762dbc29d]
[b:1762dbc29d]Romans 14[/b:1762dbc29d]
1 Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things. 2For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables. 3Let not him who eats despise him who does not eat, and let not him who does not eat judge him who eats; for God has received him. 4Who are you to judge another's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. Indeed, he will be made to stand, for God is able to make him stand. [u:1762dbc29d]5One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. 6He who observes the day, observes it to the Lord; and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it[/u:1762dbc29d]. He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he who does not eat, to the Lord he does not eat, and gives God thanks. 7For none of us lives to himself, and no one dies to himself. 8For if we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. Therefore, whether we live or die, we are the Lord's. 9For to this end Christ died and rose and lived again, that He might be Lord of both the dead and the living. 10But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. 11For it is written: "As I live, says the LORD, every knee shall bow to Me, and every tongue shall confess to God." [u:1762dbc29d]12So then each of us shall give account of himself to God. 13Therefore let us not judge one another anymore[/u:1762dbc29d], but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother's way. [/quote:1762dbc29d]

Is this the Sabbath, or days designated by the ceremonial law?

Would Paul's advice have been wrong for David? Moses?

Or would the 10 Commandments now be the 9? Could we say the same thing about coveting? Why not?

The problem with these issues is that it [i:1762dbc29d]assumes[/i:1762dbc29d] that the 4th commandment is somehow different from the other 9 and void. The moral law (10 commandments) stand or fall as a whole.
 
The Command is still in force, but the way we keep it has changed. We keep the Sabbath by being in Christ and resting from the works of the flesh. There is not a long list of things we can and cannot do on a specific day of the week but instead we celebrate the resurrection on the first day of the week following the example of the NT church.

So I am not saying that the command has been changed, just the observance of it. The Sabbath pointed to Christ and also has the already/not yet feature that we are resting in Him and this rest from the works of the flesh points to a future fulfillment when we will rest forever in heaven with Him.

Then we look at Paul in Romans 14 above and in Colossians 2:16-17

[quote:d372d4ba86][b:d372d4ba86]Colossians 2[/b:d372d4ba86]
16So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, 17which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ.[/quote:d372d4ba86]

and we see that the word "sabbaths" includes all of the OT days, even the seventh day, and that they were all a shadow that have been fulfilled. (see the usage of "sabbaths, new moons, and set feasts" in the OT to see that this includes the seventh day sabbath - some examples: 1 Chron 23:31; 2 Chron 2:4; 31:3; Neh 10:33; Hosea 2:11).

There is no clear command in Scripture where the Sabbath changed from the seventh day to the first. I do not think that we can make the case, no matter how hard we try, that the day from the creation ordinance changed. The first day is not a sabbath day.

Instead we see that the creation ordinance pointed forward to Christ and so now the day finds fulfillment in Him.

If you are in Christ you are keeping the Sabbath.

If, on the other hand, the one in seven principle is correct, the please tell me what we can and cannot do on the first day of the week. And show me how the one in seven principle is correct seeing that the OT Sabbath was clearly the seventh day. It was not "pick one day in seven and observe the sabbath." It was always (from Genesis on through the OT and even in the NT) the "seventh day". And it is never reassigned to another day.

Look at these verses. Every one of them shows that the Sabbath in the NT was on the seventh day, not the first! The day did not change.

Matthew 12:1-8, 9-14; Matthew 28:1 ( "after the Sabbath as the first day of the week began to dawn" ); Mark 1:21; 6:2; 16:1; Luke 4:31; 13:14; 23:56 ( "they rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment" ); John 5:10; 9:14; Acts 13:14, 27, 44; 16:13; 17:2; 18:4

See - the Sabbath Day in the NT is still the seventh day! But we understand from Paul in Romans 14 and Colossians 2 that the observance of the Command has changed from a day, to a Person.

So to restate:

1. The Fourth Command is still in force (preserving the moral law).
2. We keep the Fourth Command by being in Christ and by faith resting from the works of the flesh.
3. There is yet a future fulfillment of the Fourth Command for the believer in heaven, an eternal state of rest.

This view fits the OT and NT texts.

Phillip


[Edited on 4-8-04 by pastorway]
 
[i:11c3bc83e4]Originally posted by maxdetail[/i:11c3bc83e4]
Fred,
"consistently to worship" might be a bit of isogesis regarding those four verses.



I would agree that the very few Scriptures often quoted to show that the Sabbath was changed to the Lord's Day is isogesis. It is also playing the game of hermeneutic gymnastics to use these Scriptures to say that Christians must worship and keep this day holy. This is what Edwards, Owen, and others do in their works

One could play the same game per say and mention the Scriptures that speak of Paul and the others "celebrating" (is this too implied?) Pentecost and Feast of Unleavened a case that Christians today should be doing the same.


JWJ
Click to expand...
 
Genesis 2
And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.

I will be happy to read the list of books by these whom I have the greatest respect for but which of THEM can change the day which the Creator himself sanctifed.

Marriage is a creation ordinance or so later the scriptures add, "What God has brought together let no man put asunder".

I would give the same warning about God's sanctifying the 7th day. (Yes, Scott your proposition is still right. :duh:) You can change the holiness and uniqueness of the 7th day.

" The problem is that a 7th day Sabbath is Judaizing."
No it isn't, Judaizing was the diminishing of justification by faith and Paul dealt with that perfectly in Galatians and Romans. Which was the Jew at creation, Adam or Eve? There were no Jews - so the sabbath is not a jewish issue.

"Max, I would say, respectfully, that is no coincidence that only a minuscule number of Christians hold to a 7th day Sabbath."

Fred, I absolutely agree - we don't believe in coincidence, in fact the scriptures will show that God always has a remnant.
:p

I'm kidding of course but I'm not afraid of being in the minority on this because though it's a secondary issue, it is also an important issue.
I keep a seventh day sabbath and I worship with Lord's Day keepers whom I couldn't love more.

And btw if I haven't mentioned it lately, YOU GUYS ARE AWESOME!
 
That's the whole extent Scott, that I hold to a 7th day sabbath.
From there it's a matter of personal convictions and Christian liberty.
I mentioned in an above post the things I like to do on the sabbath.
I can even do work on the sabbath as long as I'm helping a friend whose ox has fallen into a ditch. I won't accept pay but a couple bottles of beer would be appreciatied. :duh:
 
Would you conclude then that as a result of this statement:

"From there it's a matter of personal convictions and Christian liberty. "

...the moral law is up to be obeyed or disobeyed as a matter of Christian liberty? (i.e. any commandment, murder, sabbath, no other gods, etc.)
 
I'm sorry Matthew, I think I agree but I'm not sure I understand your question and I can't find the context that your quote is from. Would you please explain it a little more. Thanks
 
Maxdetail said 4 posts up from this one -
[quote:7fc2067b7f]
That's the whole extent Scott, that I hold to a 7th day sabbath.
[b:7fc2067b7f]From there it's a matter of personal convictions and Christian liberty. [/b:7fc2067b7f]
I mentioned in an above post the things I like to do on the sabbath.
I can even do work on the sabbath as long as I'm helping a friend whose ox has fallen into a ditch. I won't accept pay but a couple bottles of beer would be appreciatied. :duh:
[/quote:7fc2067b7f]

Max - again, is the moral law a matter of Christian liberty or shoul dwe obey because it is the exact representation of God's character that binds all rational men into perfect conformity in character and conduct?

If it is a matter of liberty, as you said, then we have liberty in all points of the Law to keep it or obey it. But James tells us that:

James 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

See the problem? We are not allowed to pick and choose what commandment we want to follow by way of "Christian Liberty" - that is comparing apples and oranges.

If the moral law is to be kept, then we either have two options 1) we are bound by law to keep the Saturday Sabbath, or we are bound by Law to Keep the Sunday Sabbath. The question then becomes how Christ is Lord of the Sabbath and whether or not there is a shift in the pattern, and the day changes by God's appointment.
 
The question then becomes.......whether or not there is a shift in the pattern, and the day changes by God's appointment. [/quote]



This is indeed the question. I have read Edwards, Owen, and Gillifan and yet I have not found any satisfying answer (answer to justify why many believe the Sabbath was changed from Saturday to Sunday). And for those who like to use history as ad hominem fuel, be careful. There are many sources that describe the early church observing both days (Saturday and Sunday) up until the early 2nd century.

Up until recently I too was (and in my heart still am) a 7th day (Saturday) person. However, since I have taken a sabbatical (no pun intended) from teaching and preaching, I now worship on Sunday's with a fine group of OPC ers.

JWJ

JWJ
 
I wanted to add that I will never say never as to changing my current view. Maybe I will be OPCified in the near future :D

JWJ
 
[quote:386db06624]
The question then becomes.......whether or not there is a shift in the pattern, and the day changes by God's appointment.
[/quote:386db06624]

Exactly right. :chinabow:
 
My point was that this question is a good question posed by Sunday keepers, yet in my opinion, they cannot answer it with consistent hermeneutics. Could it be that the so-called shift in the pattern, and a day change by God's appointment is presupposed?

JWJ
 
Concerning the change of the day, Mk. 2:27, 28 is important. The phrase, 'Son of Man', is borrowed from Daniel and is a title for the incarnate Messiah. He is given lordship over the Sabbath. Hence, we should expect the Sabbath to take on characteristics reflective of His redemptive lordship. Since the specific day of the Sabbath is a matter of special revelation and, hence, a positive law, it can be changed by God, if He sees fit for whatever reason. In Heb. 4:9, Paul says, "There remains therefore a 'sabbatismos for the people of God." This is a hapox (word used only once). Every other use of the English 'rest' in the passage is another Greek word, 'katapausis'. Why the change? It is of interest to note that the phrase "the people of God" is used in 1 Pt. 2:10 of the church, the New Covenant people of God. Heb. 4:10 answers the qeustions of why a 'sabbatismos' remains and when it is to be observed. A 'sabbatismos' remains for the NC people of God because the eternal rest, 'katapausis', is yet future. Just as the rest of God at creation and the rest of Canaan looked forward and becasue that rest is yet future, so the NC people of God have a 'sabbatismos' in the presnt which anticipates the 'katapausis' of the eternal state. And, just as the initial weekly Sabbath was based on the fact that God rested from His works of creation on the seventh day, so the NC people of God's 'sabbatismos' is based on the fact that Christ rested from His works of re-creation on the first day. Christ entered His rest on the first day, the day He rose from the dead, the day His redemptive work was completed. This is now the 'sabbatismos' for the people of God. Just as the OC had a memorial meal and a memorial day, so the NC has both - the Lord's Supper and the Lord's Day. The Supper, like passoever, looks to the blood shed and reminds us of Christ's death for us. The Lord's Day, like the initial weekly Sabbath, both looks back to His work accomplished and reminds us of the eternal 'katapusis'. These perspectives comport well with the fact that the OT contains prophecy of a NC Sabbath. This also provides a theological basis for first day meetings in the NT - Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:1, 2. Rev. 1:10 speaks of the Lord's Day. The Lord is a reference to the ascended Lord Christ. Just as He has a supper which is peculiarly His, so He has a day that is peculiarly His. Just as all suppers are not His, in the sacrmanetal sense, so all days are not His, in the sabbatical sense.
 
Matt,
In answer to your question..... I don't know. :eek:
I'm still working through the doctrine of Christian Liberty and Moral Law. I'm only half way through with your lectures on covenantal Theology. Great stuff, opening my eyes to many things.

Keeping the sabbath has never been a moral issue to me. As I said previously, the sabbath is a gift that I gladly accept. I don't keep it to satisfy the law I keep it because of the blessedness of keeping it. I encourage others to do so for the same reason. Thank you to all for the challenging thoughts and the iron sharpening training.

What happened to Melissa?
 
Melissa is here lurking about, Bob, and thinking you missed making a good point:grin:when you had the chance.
 
Sorry Melissa, I'm at work and had problems up to my eyeballs today. :eek:
I can't resist looking in on the board (not an addiction, yet!) and I could have come up with a better response but I think Scotts original question has been answered and truth be told.... my brain got tired! Shalom Shabbat! (a day early) :biggrin:
 
Max, fair enough. its a great topic to work through. Could I suggest reading Ernest kevan's "The Grace of Law"? It is a wonderful help in this way.

Here is what you will need to work through and decide:

Since the moral law is a unit (break one you break them all) how does that affect the NT beleiver in terms of any singular commandment?

Moral law = commandments 1-10

How can one take commandment 3, and say, It is not moral for me? Or, in our discussion, commandment 4.

What allows us to pick one commandment over another. for instacne, we say that the 4th commandment is not moral. What makes commandment 7 moral and commandment 4 "unmoral?"

Think thorugh this as you think through the Law in general.
 
Thank you Matt I will do that. I obsess about books and now I won't rest til I have it in my library. lol

And thanks everyone for helping me to graduate into the junior level during that thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Romans922
  • Locked
What is the Purpose of the Sabbath?
Replies
13
Views
3K
Grace Alone
Grace Alone
ServantOfKing
  • Locked
Preaching Against the Sabbath Day?
Replies
22
Views
3K
Blueridge Believer
Blueridge Believer
OPC'n
  • Locked
I'm Confused On What Calvin Is Saying About The Sabbath
Replies
18
Views
5K
MW
M
Peairtach
  • Locked
Is cooking/preparing food on the Sabbath Day an issue or non-issue?
2 3
Replies
68
Views
36K
Peairtach
Peairtach
Texas Aggie
  • Locked
Change of sabbath day
Replies
28
Views
4K
Texas Aggie
Texas Aggie
Back
Top