Menu

What united Whitfield and Wesley: the forgotten commandment

S
sermonindex

Here (at sermonindex) and elsewhere (on the internet) the debate that once raged between Wesley and Whitefield continues: election vs. free will (or calvinism vs. arminianism). Sadly, where these men were united we have gone astray.

Deuteronomy warns, "Cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of the law to do them." Proverbs 19.6 says "He that keepth the commandement keepeth his own soul." Solomon (1 Kings 9.6) warned, "But if ye shall at all turn from following me, ye or your children, and will not keep my commandmentts and my statutes which I have set before you, but go and serve other gods, and worship them: THen will I cut off Israel out of the land which I have given them..."

Most leaders in the Christian churches confirm SOME of the words of the law to do them, but few anymore confirm ALL of them. The truth is most churches in doctrine and in practice only have 8 or 9 commandments. When I think about how often the commandments were reinforced, and how often failure to keep the commandments was given as the reason for Israel's troubles and how often even in the New Testament the commandments (1 Jn. 2.3,4; 3.4; 5.2,3, for example) were referred to, I find it frightening how terribly they have been neglected in our day.

Edwin Orr once wrote a book titled "The Church Must First Repent". I believe that if ever we will see true revival in NA he was right: the Church must first repent; and we must repent not only of homosexuality and other current sins. We need, specifically, to repent of our desecration of the Sunday Sabbath.

D.M. Lloyd-Jones once preached a sermon on Jeremaih 6.11 (on the weariness of God), and he warned of consequences for those who would disobey the 4th commandment and teach others to do likewise. It grieved him that in the 20's and 30's the churches were already growing forgetful.

In his day Robert Murray M'Cheyne warned his people of the same, as did J.C. Ryle and Charles Spurgeon after him. So also did men from most denominations whether arminian or calvinist... (Wesley, Whitefield, Brainerd and Edwards included) until the 20th century.

Should it surprise us that the century marked by horrific genocide, massive world wars, tragic doctrinal confusion and increasing immmorality and apathy in the Church should also the be the century to drop the 4th commandment? Many of us look around at the churches in NA and believe that we are in a kind of spiritual captivity. Is it any wonder? Where are the pastors who will call us to obedience to the commandments (let alone people to obey them)?! It was Malachi who once said, "For the priest's lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts. But ye are departed out of the way; ye have mcaused many to stumble at the law..."

How I pray that the Lord would raise up laypeople courageous enough to go to their pastors, take them by the sleeve (as Andrew Melville once took the King's arm!) and plead with them to return to the law and to the testimonies. We need ministers who will keep knowledge.

If ever we will see revival we need the Church to remember the Sabbath to keep it holy!

H
Heydave

Stephen,

Before I write, this is a genuine question and point I am making in response to your post. It is not made to be argumentative or to prove any point. So with that established here is my question.

Why in the book of Acts do read that when the Apostles had to give a ruling to the Gentiles about keeping the law they only gave the following advice

"For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;

That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well." Acts 15:28-29

Why did they not just say 'keep the 10 commandments'?

Another thought occurred to me. Do true Christians really need a law to tell them to 'Have no other Gods' or 'to have no idols'?

S
sermonindex

the debate that once raged between Wesley and Whitefield

Brother, I believe they never fully reconciled over these things but agreed to disagree on the issue. The true unity was not on obeying the ten commandments but rather on loving Jesus Christ supremely and recognizing they are both part of one body of Christ. The way of Jesus Christ is higher than the ten commandments in that all of his commands in the New Covenant fulfill and walk in the ten commandments.

Another New Covenant truth is that Jesus Christ is our Sabbath. Here is a very good article to consider:

Principle 47 ”“ The Lord’s Day can be Everyday! (pdf)
http://gospelfellowships.net/pdf/principle47.pdf

Also the Sabbath was practiced by the Jewish saints on Saturday. Yet the early Christians (apostles and disciples) met together on the Lord's Day (Sunday) they did not feel the compulsion to continue the Saturday Sabbath.

May our unity be firstly in that we are part of the body of Christ.

M
MaryJane

Greg wrote:Another New Covenant truth is that Jesus Christ is our Sabbath. Here is a very good article to consider:

Principle 47 ”“ The Lord’s Day can be Everyday! (pdf)
http://gospelfellowships.net/pdf/principle47.pdf
_____________

Wonderful!! Yes JESUS is our Sabbath, let us pray that the CHURCH remember that HE is our Sabbath and we need to be living in HIM everyday!! Let us also pray for unity in HIM that HE be lifted up and glorified!!

Thank you for also sharing the link to the article.

God bless
maryjane

A
amranger

We need, specifically, to repent of our desecration of the Sunday Sabbath.

Sunday is not the sabbath, and it never was. Having said that, sabbath-keeping in regards to a specific day is never commanded in the new testament. Hebrews does speak about entering His rest but that's not in regards to a specific day.

If I feel led to I may post later on what I believe is the hindrance to revival and spiritual awakening. But I wanted to clear that up about the sabbath.

S
sermonindex

Brothers (and sisters!) I want to plead with you to weigh very carefully the testimony of Church history. This site is evidence of the value we place on the teaching and preaching ministry of godly men. We all testify that the Scriptures alone are our rule, but we do go to others to help us to grow in our understanding of those Scriptures. Do consider reading what men like John Elias and Ryle and Spurgeon and M'Cheyne (ed. and Leonard Ravenhill - http://media.sermonindex.net/4/SID4361.mp3 or here for some of the transcript: https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=48290&forum=34) said about the Christian Sabbath. They were familiar with all the arguments now being made against the keeping of a particular day, including the argument posed by brother Greg that every day is now a Sabbath - but they argued cogently and from the Scriptures that the first day of the week (which Scripture gives the name Lord's Day) is a day that we are to set aside particularly and especially for worship.

Greg, I read through that document. One of the arguments made against fighting over the day of worship is the persecutions of Christians in places like China. Lets admit, brother, that we would never allow such an argument to have any part in a discussion over the first commandment. Men and women and even children have laid down their lives rather than disobey God for centuries. The question isn't "how does this doctrine/ethic work in the persecuted world"? Rather, we ought to be asking "What is God's will?"

Of course, if we were contending for the Sunday Sabbath based on personal preference, we would be foolish to foist those preferences on the persecuted - but if Sunday is the Lord's Day and therefore to be given to Him (as the Saturday used to be) then persecution (or consequences) are quite irrelevant. As our forefathers used to say, "duty is ours, events are God's."

Let me add that the early Christians did not continue to keep the Saturday Sabbath because they were now keeping the first day of the week.

I think we need to keep in mind that the OT believers were required to love God with all their heart mind and soul, which is no more than what the NT says. They were to love Him and worship Him and serve Him every day of the week just as you (Greg) and others are arguing... still, God wanted them to specially set aside one day a week for Him.

Heydave, the church in Acts 15 met specifically to address whether or not the ceremonial laws should be required of the Gentiles. The 4th commandment is not a ceremonial law. It was observed and obeyed before the fall! [edit: Which is why Colossians 2 is not relevant. Colossians 2 is a reference to the ceremonial days that came with the 4th commandment including the additional sabbaths. These are done away with because they were shadows. The Sabbath itself was instituted at creation before the fall and therefore cannot be included among the shadows which must be done away with. So also Romans in its discussion of days is a reference to ceremonial days and other kinds of days like our Christmas and our Easter - a very different thing from a commandment]

Greg, you observed: "May our unity be firstly in that we are part of the body of Christ." I wholeheartedly agree with you, but I would add that when men claim to be part of the body of Christ and live in sin we have trouble with that. We have trouble uniting with 'gay Christians' and 'idolatrous Christians' because we recognize that something very fundamental is wrong. To preach Jesus is to preach Him in all His offices, prophet, priest and King, and when He is not obeyed all the body of Christ ought to mourn.

I think part of the difficulty with this commandment is that the hermeneutic of the contemporary church is so different from that of our forefathers. We want to see it in plain language in the New Testament because we have so divided the New from the Old. But I would contend that if we are to walk as Christ walked and follow the example of the apostles we have enough. They called it the Lord's Day. Calling a meal the Lord's Supper is enough to indicate to everyone it is not an ordinary meal and that treating it as if it were ordinary can lead to serious consequences. The very designation of the day as the Lord's Day ought (I think) to be argument enough. But we do have the example of our Lord in John 20, we have the pattern of the apostles, and we have the many foreshadowings in the OT of the coming 8th day.

M
MaryJane

Greetings Greg

Got to read over the article at the link posted. I often wonder why some would stop at meeting just one day a week, when JESUS calls us to live each day in HIM. JESUS is my rest, and everything else, I need to live that every day not just one day. I also look to the book of Acts and see that they met one to another daily from house to house loving and caring for each other as each had need. They were the CHURCH meeting daily, loving one another in HIM daily, submitting to HIM daily that is what church is. Its not a place we go on a special day of the week, its a way of life we live each moment of every day.


God bless and thanks
mj

S
sermonindex

Hi MaryJane, did you read my post? As I explained there

"I think we need to keep in mind that the OT believers were required to love God with all their heart mind and soul, which is no more than what the NT says. They were to love Him and worship Him and serve Him every day of the week just as you (Greg) and others are arguing... still, God wanted them to specially set aside one day a week for Him."

I have work to do and chores to do that have to get done sometime. God in His wisdom and kindness has given us a day in which we are allowed and commanded to be shut up with Him.

The difference is between my enjoying fellowship with my wife at the kitchen sink vs. going out for dinner where we have each others time and attention. We love both, but we especially love that one on one time specially devoted to enjoying each other.

M
MaryJane

by Stephen2 on 2013/11/5 9:52:13

Hi MaryJane, did you read my post? As I explained there

"I think we need to keep in mind that the OT believers were required to love God with all their heart mind and soul, which is no more than what the NT says. They were to love Him and worship Him and serve Him every day of the week just as you (Greg) and others are arguing... still, God wanted them to specially set aside one day a week for Him."

I have work to do and chores to do that have to get done sometime. God in His wisdom and kindness has given us a day in which we are allowed and commanded to be shut up with Him.

The difference is between my enjoying fellowship with my wife at the kitchen sink vs. going out for dinner where we have each others time and attention. We love both, but we especially love that one on one time specially devoted to enjoying each other.

___________________

Greetings Stephen

I did read your posts, thanks for sharing what the LORD has placed on your heart. I understand for you this is a conviction that you feel led to follow so I think that is awesome, for me it is not. I have read much on this as well. I have prayed and sought the LORD for understanding and for me living unto HIM every moment of every day is what it is all about not one day a week.JESUS is my all, HE deserves my attention in all things. IF I am doing the dishes and JESUS shows me something then I love the fact that I can stop what I am doing and spend time with HIM. I also see the benefit of spending time with other believes as often as possible, for some I know this means they meet every single day, their lives are intertwined one to another and JESUS is lifted up. I think that is what we saw in ACTS and it was clear the love they had for each other and HIM. I get what you are saying and if that is where you are being led then you need to follow HIM in that, but for me I am just so thankful I can have that intimate time with HIM every moment of the day.I can pray, speak with HIM, and sit and hear from HIM as well, daily I can read my WORD and share with others.

Thanks again for sharing how the LORD is leading you in your walk with HIM.

God bless
maryjane

S
sermonindex

Brother I post this with reservation as I see how the other thread on the Old Covenant vs the New Covenant has progressed.

But that is the heart of the matter. To put it simply. The Old Covenant was given to Israel. The Sabbath was a command for Israel to keep.

We are under the New Covenant. As others have said Christ is our Sabbath rest. Everyday is to be a Sabbath rest to Him.

I do agree with the wisdom that one should set aside a day to reflect upon Christ and His word and be refreshed in Him. But that day need not be Sunday. It could be any day of the week. And what I am suggesting is Christ centered wisdom and not command.

I believe the reason we are not seeing seeing revival on a national level is not because we are keeping Sunday as the Sabbath. It us more that the church had turned sway from Christ.

One other thing. Believers in the 10/40 window are being persecuted because of their faith in Jesus. Not because they fail to keep Sunday as the Sabbith.

Bearmaster.

S
sermonindex

For those who argue that Sunday is to be a day of rest. A Sabbath. They are often the most exhausted by the end if the day.

Here is how a typical Sunday or Sabbath may go. Get up. Get some time with the Lord. Get breakfast. Get family dressed. Off to church. Run to Sunday school. Get kids to nursery. Run to church service. Out the door. Eat lunch. Maybe grab a 30 minute nap. Have some quick time with family. Then back to church for evening service. Take care of s few things in evening. Then collapse in bed. Is this s Sabbath rest.

Monday morning at work is almost quite relaxing compared to Sunday.

Bearmaster.

H
Heydave

Stephen,

May be you can tell us how you use your day of rest.

edit: What does your typical Sunday look like?

A
a-servant

What most people trained themselves to overlook in Acts 15 is:

Acts 15:19  Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

The basis of "that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:"

is this: "For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day."

Teaching of the law was so common in every city, that nothing had to be added as a schoolmaster to come to Christ.

Once you take that schoolmaster out, and replace it with benefit driven messages like "God wants you to be happy in this life and the next" - you just left God's preordained way to convert anyone, as almost nobody is convicted of their sin.

What do you get without conviction of sin and repentance? You get American theology that sounds just like that:

"I fully adhere to the fundamental tenets of Christian faith for myself and my ministry. But, as an American, I respect other paths to God”“and, as a Christian, I am called on to love them”

"But, as an American, I respect other paths to God"

So one side of him is a Christian, the other side is American. Both have their own paths to God. It sounds like the peace and unity one can achieve within one personality once the opposing powers of yin and yang are contolled by a higher principle of tolerance. Respect, tolerance and love. It's only 'Truth' that is missing.

"I used to believe that pagans in far-off countries were lost”“were going to hell”“if they did not have the Gospel of Jesus Christ preached to them. I no longer believe that. I believe that there are other ways of recognizing the existence of God”“through nature, for instance”“and plenty of other opportunities, therefore, of saying ‘yes’ to God”

Billy Graham’s Strange Fire
http://www.scionofzion.com/bgsf.htm

S
savannah

They who are disposed to glory in the flesh, they urge you to become circumcised, only that they may not be persecuted on account of the cross of the Messiah.
For not even they themselves, who are circumcised, keep the law: but they wish you to become circumcised, that they may glory in your flesh.
But as for me, let me not glory, except in the cross of our Lord Jesus the Messiah; by whom the world is crucified to me, and I am crucified to the world.
For circumcision is nothing; neither is uncircumcision; but a new creation.
And as many as shall walk by this rule, peace and mercy be on them and on the Israel of God.
Henceforth let no one put trouble upon me; for I bear in my body the marks of our Lord Jesus the Messiah.
My brethren, the grace of our Lord Jesus the Messiah, be with your spirit. Amen. Galatians 6:12-18

For he is not a Jew who is so outwardly, neither is circumcision that which is outward in flesh; but a Jew is he who is so inwardly, and circumcision is of the heart, in spirit, not in letter, of which the praise is not of men, but of God. Romans 2:28,29

For we, the ones believing, enter into the rest, even as He said, "As I swore in My wrath, they shall not enter into My rest," though the works had come into being from the foundation of the world. Hebrews 4:3

Our rest[Sabbath]is not to be found in a day but rather in a Person[Messiah Jesus].

For He is our peace, He making us both one, and breaking down the middle wall of partition, in His flesh causing to cease the enmity, the Law of the commandments in decrees, that He might in Himself create the two into one new man, making peace, and might reconcile both in one body to God through the cross, slaying the enmity in Himself.
And coming, He proclaimed "peace to you, the ones afar off, and to the ones near."
For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father.
So, then, you are no longer strangers and tenants, but you are fellow citizens of the saints and of the family of God,
being built up on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the cornerstone,
in whom all the building being fitted together grows into a holy temple in the Lord,
in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling place of God in the Spirit. Ephesians 2:14-22

For ye are all the children of God, by faith in Jesus the Messiah. For they who have been baptized into the Messiah, have put on the Messiah.
There cannot be Jew nor Greek, there is no slave nor freeman, there is no male and female;for ye are all one in Jesus the Messiah.
And if ye are the Messiah's, then are ye the seed of Abraham, and heirs by the promise. Galatians 3:26-29

For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation; and as many as by this rule do walk,peace upon them, and mercy, and on the Israel of God! Galatians 6:15,16

And therefore, we know no person after the flesh: and if we have known the Messiah after the flesh, yet henceforth we know him no more. Whoever therefore is in the Messiah, is a new creation: old things have passed away and all things are made new. 2 Corinthians 5:16,17

Know ye, therefore, that those who are of faith, they are the children of Abraham.
Now the Scripture having foreseen that God justifies the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel before to Abraham: "All the nations will be blessed" "in you."
So that those of faith are blessed with the faithful Abraham.
For they who are of the deeds of the law, are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one who shall not do every thing written in this law.
And that no one becometh just before God, by the law, is manifest: because it is written, The just by faith, shall live.
Now the law is not of faith; but, whoever shall do the things written in it, shall live by them.
But the Messiah hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, and hath been a curse for us; (for it is written, Cursed is everyone that is hanged on a tree) that the blessing of Abraham might be on the Gentiles, through Jesus the Messiah; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit by faith. Galatians 3:7-14

And as many as shall walk by this rule, peace and mercy be on them and on the Israel of God. Galatians 6:16

The 'Israel of God' are those forming the true messianic community.

H
Heydave

a-servant. Thanks for highlighting that verse from Acts 15. It is an important point and I had not considered it before.

I agree with what you have said in regard to the law being a school master to lead us to Christ, so we have a correct conviction of sin and need for repentance. You did not comment though on the aspect of this verse if it is saying that the law (and in particular the Sabbath) is still a requirement for gentiles. What are your thoughts on this?

Stephen - As you stated that the Sunday Sabbath is something we should be keeping, I think it only right that you tell us how exactly you keep this day in a practical outworking, so we can see what you mean.

S
sermonindex

Hebrews 7:12
For when the priesthood is changed of necessity there takes place a change in law also.

Hebrews 8:6
But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been built on better promises.

Hebrews 8:13
When He says "A New Covenant", He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear.
.........................................................
Brothers, respectfully, I must challenge your notions that the New Testament teaches a Sabbath obligation to believers. For you to insist such is putting New Testament believers under a yoke which according to Peter neither our father's nor we have been able to bear (Acts 15:10).

As New Covenant believers we are not under a command to keep Saturday or Sunday as a day unto the Lord. If anything all days are alike as unto Christ ad Paul writes in Romans 15:5. And because we live in the reality and substance of Christ no one is to be our judge over feast days and sabboths as Paul writes in Col. 2:16-17. For he states that these are a shadow of Him who is to come. That being Jesus.

Brothers, Hebrews 4, the whole chapter, teaches that Jesus Christ is our Sabbath rest in the New Covenant, not a day. As such New Covenant believers are bound to the Sabbath Rest of Jesus Himself. Not to observe a day.

Bear.


A
a-servant

Heydave, when you consider the original intention of Acts 15 for a while, you can arrive at the reason why we are in the situation we are today.

Almost nobody is teaching the 10 commandments anymore, they start straight with the NT and the main components of grace, love and forgiveness of sin. While nobody really is able to see the problem with their own sins, without the teaching of God's standard, and happily accepts to just put grace "on top of it all" - In the expectation the resulting condition will be Biblical Christianity. And it rarely is.

Are the 10 commandments "requirement" for gentiles? Once you are part of the family of God, there are no more gentiles. We are part of God's economy and join his plan, Jesus does not join the American or British church.

What laws are written on our hearts as part of the New Covenant? Ever thought about that, personally I agree with James and call it the royal law, and I define love according to the scriptures: 1 John 5:3  For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

Apart from that I don't think of them as "requirement*" - because you cannot require love. If they are not written on your heart, you cannot keep them, nor would you want to, in that case they would be your school master to show you that something might be missing in your relationship.
* "requirement" - what does not mean God does not think of them as requirements, His standards are higher than mine.

Should you however refuse to acknowledge the right of the school master to teach you God's eternal standard, your walk with the Lord will suffer in one way or another as a result. That's proven over and over again to everyone that really pays attention. Even over such "small things" as the 4th commandment, see: Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. Matthew 5:19


S
sermonindex

Hi MaryJane, thanks for your reply. I just want to say that I share with you 100% what you said: ///and for me living unto HIM every moment of every day is what it is all about not one day a week.JESUS is my all, HE deserves my attention in all things.///

So it should be for every Christian... and so it was in the OT when the people were commanded to love God with whole heart soul and mind. Nonetheless, God in His wisdom and His grace gave them a special day where they could specially focus on Him. MaryJane, the more that we feel that way about Him the more we are going to cherish a day in which we have nothing else but Him! The more I enjoy my wife every day the more I look forward to special days where we can enjoy one on one time free of distractions. Of course, you and I are talking about preferences, but it does come down to the question of whether or not God's commandments are still applicable to us.

Heydave said: ///Stephen - As you stated that the Sunday Sabbath is something we should be keeping, I think it only right that you tell us how exactly you keep this day in a practical outworking, so we can see what you mean.///

Brother, I think someone else on this thread has pointed out that often at the end of a Sunday they are tired out. So am I... but I believe it was the Pharisees mistake to think the Sabbath was a day off. The Sabbath even in the OT was very busy for the Levites. The Sabbath is a day for worship not a day off.

I can tell you a little of what I do, but far less important than how I keep the day is how the day should be kept.

In my home we try do all our chores the day before, so that on Sunday we don't have any work to do (and we don't make others work by going to restaurants). We also put aside all kinds of entertainment and sports... then with all that free time we go to worship service twice, and in between we do Bible stories and worship with the kids. In our home we try to - in a sense - shut ourselves up with God. This is how our forefathers treated the day and the more that I have sought to keep this day holy the more that the Lord has blessed our family. Our whole family looks forward to Sundays, and we come away physically tired but spiritually refreshed.

Bearmaster, Acts 15 is dealing with the ceremonial component of the law. Of course, the 10 commandments when treated as a means of salvation or justification are a burden no one can bear. I find it very fascinating that when we take the 10 commandments to the unsaved they invariably take offense. To the unbeliever God's holy standards are a burden that is unbearable. What makes the Christian such a miracle is that he is so changed by the miracle of regeneration that like David he delights in God's law and longs to do it and as Ezekiel 36 says, is actually made able to do it.

"For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous (1 Jn 5.3)." What I find sad, is when Christians talk like non-Christians. No, the law properly understood is not a burden but a joy! "Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law."

We could discuss Hebrews more, but I gather from the posts so far that the debate we are having is more fundamental... its back to the question of the newness of the new covenant. Does our Bible begin at Matthew or Genesis?

H
Heydave

a-servant... Well that sure is a long way round to say what?
A lot of words that we would agree on, but I'm not sure what your answer is!

I think you are saying the law of the Sabbath is on our hearts. If so does that mean we would naturally enjoy that 'rest in God' and be set apart for him every day or just one special day?

Quote:"Are the 10 commandments "requirement" for gentiles? Once you are part of the family of God, there are no more gentiles. We are part of God's economy and join his plan, Jesus does not join the American or British church."

Of course there is no difference. All believers are one family. I thought you would understand what I meant by the subject matter, not pick apart every word.

S
sermonindex

Brothers you quote Galatians 3:24 which states that the law became out tutor or school master to lead us to Chtist. And that so we may be justified by faith. But you have to kook at the verse that follows in which Paul writes that now that faith has come we are no longer under s tutor. In other words we are not under law. Indeed Paul states in Gal. 3:12 that the law is not of faith. He also says that whoever practices the commands of the law will live by them. And as such under a curse.

Then how is the New Covenant believer governed in ethical conduct that God requires? The answer is found in Gal.5:16. Walking by the Spirit. For if we walk by the Spirit we will not carry out the desires of the flesh. Thus our obedience to Christ is an internal working of the Spirit that give rise to His fruit. That being love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control. Against these internal virtues of the heart Paul says there is no law as stated in Gal. 5:23. Paul also reminds us in Gal.5:18 that if we are led by the Spirit we are not under the law. This the believer is governed by the inward working of the Holy Spirit and not by observing an external law.

Paul admonishes the Galatians in 4:10 that they are observing days and months and seasons and years. He fears he has run his gospel race in vain.

I dare say one will be hard pressed to find in the New Covenant writings that which we call the New Testament a binding sabboth command.

It has been said take a young believer who has been converted out of paganism. Give him a New Testament. Put him or her on an island for a year or so. They will not come to the conclusions that are embraced in this forum. That new believerwill believe God's gifts are for today. That new believer will not embrace tithing. And for sure that new believer will see our Sabbath rest is in Jesus and not a day.

Bearmaster.


H
Heydave

Hi Stephen,

Thank you for your response and description of 'your' Sabbath. We view the day a bit differently to you, but also see that there is much to be gained in keeping a particular day for fellowship and rest. May the Lord bless you and your family as you seek to honour and worship Him with your lives.

One principle I think we should keep in mind is Jesus' interpretation of the 'Sabbath being made for man and not man for the Sabbath'. It was God's gift to us and not meant to make us slaves to it. So the Pharisees 'worked hard' at keeping it, but Jesus let his disciples relax and enjoy being in His presence.

S
sermonindex

Thanks Heydave! I am grateful for the grace that is evident in the conversation on this thread.

I love the principle you mentioned, ///One principle I think we should keep in mind is Jesus' interpretation of the 'Sabbath being made for man and not man for the Sabbath'./// The Sabbath like the other commandments is a gift. Just think how you would respond if someone invited you to live out your freedom in Christ by straying from the first commandment and enjoying some other gods. You would respond with every bit of feeling you could muster "NEVER!" Freedom in Christ is a wonderful thing when that freedom is freedom from sin and Satan.

///Paul also reminds us in Gal.5:18 that if we are led by the Spirit we are not under the law. This the believer is governed by the inward working of the Holy Spirit and not by observing an external law.///

Bearmaster the testimony of Scripture is that the Holy Spirit internally moves us to obey and delight in an external law. Everyone here at sermonindex would agree that there is an objective standard that is right and wrong and whether people know it or not is beside the point. So, there is nothing wrong with an external code. The homosexual ought not to practice homosexuality. The pedophile ought not to hurt children. The liar ought not to lie. But only the inward working of the Holy Spirit can make a homosexual not a homosexual and a pedophile not a pedophile and a liar not a liar - but you notice nothing happened to the external code!! What happened happened to the individual.

What I am noticing in discussions here is that people are saying there is something wrong with the external code. The Bible says, rather, the problem is in our hearts - and this is where God makes His people stand out as salt and light, by so changing them that their attitude to that external code becomes different. They respond to the "oughts" with "I want" - but please again remember the "oughts" haven't vanished. God hasn't changed, it is we who have changed.

Bearmaster, people are saying there is no binding command in the NT against homosexuality. Most pastors I know respond by pointing to the OT to support the few hints they find in the New. Those who advocate on behalf of 'gay Christians' respond by saying what many in the Church are saying about the Sabbath - that it is part of a ceremonial law that has been abrogated.

The irony of Galatians 4.10 is that we do honour days in the Church today: Easter, Christmas, Thanksgiving... and these are the kinds of days Paul was referring to: that whole system of feasts and weeks are all gone because part of a ceremonial system - but the Sabbath was set apart before the fall and is part of the 10 commandments and continued to be observed and followed by our Lord and His apostles.

Even the name given to Sunday speaks volumes. Like the Lord's Supper which is a meal set apart from common use, so the Lord's Day is a day set apart from commmon use.

M
MaryJane

by Stephen2 on 2013/11/6 6:34:00

Hi MaryJane, thanks for your reply. I just want to say that I share with you 100% what you said: ///and for me living unto HIM every moment of every day is what it is all about not one day a week.JESUS is my all, HE deserves my attention in all things.///

So it should be for every Christian... and so it was in the OT when the people were commanded to love God with whole heart soul and mind. Nonetheless, God in His wisdom and His grace gave them a special day where they could specially focus on Him. MaryJane, the more that we feel that way about Him the more we are going to cherish a day in which we have nothing else but Him! The more I enjoy my wife every day the more I look forward to special days where we can enjoy one on one time free of distractions. Of course, you and I are talking about preferences, but it does come down to the question of whether or not God's commandments are still applicable to us

_____________________________

Thank you for your response. Jesus is my Sabbath and God does desire time with me.

The two quotes below speak to my heart on this topic:

God deeply desires that we bury ourselves in Him, and not in our work and our duties and distractions and noises! (For me Sunday service was most of the time noise, distraction and duties not quiet one on one time with JESUS. There was never any rest, but there was much distraction.)

Take the time to separate yourself in the blood and spirit of Jesus, apart from the sensory overload, the world and your flesh and your "responsibilities” and your television and computer and sports may want to feed you! There is a Sabbath Rest for the People of God, in Christ. (For me I have learned that time with HIM can and often does happen daily. every moment I spend with the LORD is special and precious to me. I love the times when a few saints are gathered together in HIM praying and seeking to further HIS KINGDOM as well as times spent alone singing and praises HIM. I do believe GOD commands us to spend time with HIM, God does that I spend time with HIM, it just doesn't have to be on a Sunday)

Brother I suspect there are some other points we might not agree upon but I believe GOD is working in both our lives and HE will reveal HIMSELF in HIS timing to lead us according to HIS good and perfect will. I realize some of our differences will keep us from having fellowship together on this topic but it does not lessen my love for you.

Thank you for your kind responses and sharing your heart here with me.

God bless
maryjane

S
sermonindex

Brother my understanding is the Jews never made the distinction in the Mosaic Law between moral civil, and ceremonial. To them the law was the law. It was a whole, not 3 parts. It was theologians who came and divided the law into the components of civil, ceremonial, and moral.

The Holy Spirit dqoes not move one to observe an external code as more He has already written His law on our hearts and minds. The writer of Hebrews conveys this in Heb.8:10 and Heb.10:16.

What laws has the Spirit written in our hearts and minds. I believe those Jesus stated in Mat 22:37-40. Those two commands of love of God and love of neighbor. Paul reaffirms this in Rom. 13:9 when he writes if there is any other commandment it is summed up in the statement "You shall live your neighbor as yourself". One under the New Covenant does not need to be instructed by an external code as the Spirit had already written His law of love if God and love of neighbor into our hearts.

Again brother Paul writes in Rom.7:6 that we serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter. And again Paul writes in 2 Cor.3:3 & 6 that God has written His law on our hearts by the Holy Spirit. Namely love of God and neighbor.

Brother if you are reasoning that one should have time to rest and reflect upon God then I would agree. As I stated in my earlier post this is good Christ centered wisdom. But that is something the Spirit can work out in the believer. The New Testament does not bind the believer to a Sabbath day. But the believer under the New Covenant is bound to Jesus who us our Sabbath rest.

Bearmaster.

S
sermonindex

What I am noticing in discussions here is that people are saying there is something wrong with the external code. The Bible says, rather, the problem is in our hearts - and this is where God makes His people stand out as salt and light, by so changing them that their attitude to that external code becomes different. They respond to the "oughts" with "I want" - but please again remember the "oughts" haven't vanished. God hasn't changed, it is we who have changed.

Bearmaster, people are saying there is no binding command in the NT against homosexuality. Most pastors I know respond by pointing to the OT to support the few hints they find in the New. Those who advocate on behalf of 'gay Christians' respond by saying what many in the Church are saying about the Sabbath - that it is part of a ceremonial law that has been abrogated.

It is simply clear in the New Testament that there is not a binding day that Christians have to rest and not work. We are to treat everyday as towards the Lord and it is wise to spend a day or longer apart for the Lord Himself to seek Him and spend time in His word. But everyday is holy in Jesus Christ, He has our all, we are not to give 10% he has our 100%.

Seventh Day Aventism is a new Christian sect that started around the same time as over 50-100 other groups such as Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, Christian Scientists and others to name a few. They hold that if one does not keep the Saturday Sabbath that they are in a sense taking the mark of the best. Such is not the Gospel and they are preaching a false gospel of the three angels and not the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ that was commanded to be preached in the Gospel accounts.

You can read more on this sect here: http://carm.org/seventh-day-adventism

Aberrant Teachings

Our sins will ultimately be placed on Satan.1
Jesus is Michael the Archangel.
Worship must be done on Saturday (the Sabbath).
On October 22, 1844 Jesus entered the second and last phase of his atoning work.
Investigative Judgment - the fate of all people will be decided based upon this event in the future.
The dead do not exist anymore -- soul sleep.
The wicked are annihilated.
Ellen G. White, the "founder" of Seventh Day Adventism, was a messenger from God gifted with the spirit of prophecy.
There is a sanctuary in heaven where Jesus carries out his mediatorial work.

Another resource to learn more:
http://leavingsda.com

S
sermonindex

Hi Greg, the Seventh Day Adventists are a sect, and their view is not one I hold. The position I hold is one that was shared by Leonard Ravenhill, Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Charles Spurgeon, J.C. Ryle, the Bonar brothers, Robert Murray M'Cheyne, John Newton, Whitefield, Wesley, etc.

I believe as our forefathers taught that Sunday is the Christian Sabbath, and I do wholeheartedly reject the aberrant teachings (of the Seventh Day Adventists) which you listed.

Of course, you are right that we are to give our Lord 100% rather than 10%. In the Old Testament that was put this way, "And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." I am not contending for 10%. Rather, I believe that while we are to love the Lord with all our heart soul and mind every day all the day (!) God still gave the Sabbath commandment, so He must have known something about us that we don't.

When I held the view you hold the reality was that while I attempted to worship Him every day, by failing to set apart any day as particularly His, all my days were alike. All were marked by worship, play and work. Anyone taught to observe the Sabbath will tell you that six days a week they also give to worship, play and work. On this score they are exactly like their anti-Sabbatarian counterparts. Sundays, however, are unique because even as they continue to worship, work and play are set aside so that worship can be given the special attention it deserves.

You said, ///It is simply clear in the New Testament that there is not a binding day that Christians have to rest and not work.///

Brother, it is not so clear. It wasn't so clear to our forefathers, and I would love for the opportunity to explain why.

Briefly, the texts which seem (to some) to reject the Sabbath command tell us that these days (of which they speak) are shadows. A shadow is something which points to work of Jesus Christ... that is its sole (!) function, so that when Christ (the substance) has come there is no need for them - and this is exactly the purpose of the feast days and Sabbath weeks and extra days in the Old Testament (see Colossians 2). They pointed to the work of Christ.

The Sabbath, however,was set apart before the fall, when there was no need of such shadows. It was, like marriage, a creation ordinance. This is the reasoning of our forefathers and most of the men from previous generations who's sermons are posted on this website.

Edited: I did want to thank you MaryJane for your reply and your kindness. Bearmaster, I will get back to what you wrote shortly.

S
sermonindex

Stephen2:

Thank you for your post.

What is the name of the sermon that you posted by Leonard Ravenhill?

The link you posted on the transcript did not open. Please find the links you posted below:

(ed. and Leonard Ravenhill - http://media.sermonindex.net/4/SID4361.mp3 or here for some of the transcript: https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=48290&forum=34) said about the Christian Sabbath.

Thanks, KM

S
sermonindex

Hi soldout2him, I don't know why the link is not working. However, if you will do a Google search for "Leonard Ravenhill Sabbath" you will find the first two items to come up are links to the sermon both here and at sermon audio and those links do work.

Here is the quote from Leonard Ravenhill's sermon as quoted by turn,

///Some notes starting at 49:30 into the message

The greatest thing in the world is to hear the voice of God as far as I am concerned. My heart dances with joy when I hear His voice. I would rather hear God's voice in rebuke than anybody else's voice in flattery. If he rebukes me, He loves me. If I'm coasting on and it's all so easy, forget it. We should be able to kiss the rod. His correction is to move us to perfection...perfect in love...perfect in obedience...perfect in doing His will.

You take on the atmosphere in which you are born. If you get born in a worldly church, you will be worldly all your life til the Holy Ghost gets a hold of you.

Isn't it something now? We have a sanctified bowling alley next to the church. They opened a bowling alley and asked somebody to pray over it. I think they got mixed up. You know they read about Peter. It said he was bold. They got it all mixed up. All those things are going to dry up before long. There's going to be a sudden surge into maturity. When I became a man…. You remember the day when you gave up every blessed thing that was a hindrance to you. (Now) you won't give it up. Don't pray about it. You don't need to pray about it. All you have to do is to be obedient.

You don't need to ask God if you need to keep the Ten Commandments. You better keep them or you will be in trouble. I chased some of you who don't keep the Sabbath.

Don't you pray for a loved or someone else when you are fooling around on Sundays and won't keep the sabbath. Some of you go to movies on Sunday night.

You, keep the sabbath day holy. Some of you who used to come here a lot said: "I don't think I need to keep the Sabbath Days. It's Old Testament." Your neighbor thinks they don't have to keep the other Ten Commandments like "Thou shalt not commit adultery". You break one commandment. He breaks the other. If you break one, you are guilty of all.

God hangs revival on the keeping of the sabbath. Read Isaiah 58.

"Take your foot from my sabbath". That's when football is you see.

"Take your foot from doing your pleasure on my holy day".

The sabbath (not half of it) is God's tithe on your time. It's His for twenty-four hours. It's not giving God the Sunday morning service and next a buck in the offering and then dashing off to Campden Fair amongst all the junk.

Now, I talk straight...

The Christian life will only work one way and that is God's way.

God is not committed to bless anything you do that's outside of His Word and His Will. Whether you like it or not isn't the point.

He has said it: If you love Him, you will keep His commandments. I believe that means the Decalogue or the Ten Commandments as well as the new commandment that we should love one another. There's a needy world outside.///

Leonard Ravenhill was not infallible but I found it fascinating that he said "God hangs revival on the keeping of the sabbath. Read Isaiah 58." !!

S
Sree

When I held the view you hold the reality was that while I attempted to worship Him every day, by failing to set apart any day as particularly His, all my days were alike. All were marked by worship, play and work. Anyone taught to observe the Sabbath will tell you that six days a week they also give to worship, play and work. On this score they are exactly like their anti-Sabbatarian counterparts. Sundays, however, are unique because even as they continue to worship, work and play are set aside so that worship can be given the special attention it deserves.

I normally do not get involved in such discussion, but I find that you really have a good way to place your argument. I find logic in the way you successfully answered the weak argument placed by few here. So I believe you will not end up fighting in a nasty way!!!

I agree in OC( old covenant) as well men worshiped and prayed rest of the days as well. But the worship in OC is external. Jesus said that there comes the time when believers will worship in spirit and truth(John 4). We live in that time. Their worship and singing were all external worship. Hence they needed a day to sit and read the commandments that were only written on external things like stones and papers. The spirit was never given to a level of dwelling inside them. But now we can have spiritual worship even when we are at work(Romans 12:1). There no need for me to go to temple or even church for worship. I can do it all the time. Everyday I have the door open for me to enter into rest with God (Hebrews 6). There is no need to wait for a particular day to sit and read the externally written commands because the commands are internal written in my heart(Hebrews 8). Still I go to church on Sundays so that I can be an encouragement and also get encouraged by hearing God's word spoken through prophets and teachers. In short the rest of sabbath is not physical rest but a fellowship.

We have eternal life which is to know (fellowship with) God (John 17). The word know is same as the one used in Adam knew eve. So that kind of intimate fellowship we have with God on this earth. Hence there is no point in resting from physical work and seeking fellowship on day alone when we have eternal life every day till eternity.

S
sermonindex

I thought I would repost the following,

///Leonard Ravenhill was not infallible but I found it fascinating that he said "God hangs revival on the keeping of the sabbath. Read Isaiah 58." !!///

You can read the rest of Ravenhill's comments on the Sabbath in an earlier post.

Bearmaster, it is very common today to drop the distinction between moral, civil and judicial. Certainly you will never find it neatly divided in so many words in the Old Testament, just as you will not find the doctrine of the trinity spelled out in so many words. Nonetheless, I think we all instinctively recognize the division. We know that even though children are still supposed to honour their parents we shouldn't stone them when they don't. We've separated the moral and the judicial and it didn't take the help of a theologian. The same is true of the ceremonial washings. We understand that these are ceremonial and so have no relevance to us, but we have no trouble discussing the story of Sodom and Gomorrah as a story that still has relevance, because we see that in the case of Sodom and Gomorrah the issue was a moral one.

Some laws reflect the character of God, so we would never expect them to change. Other laws have a temporary purpose like rules for children. I think we actually know this instinctively, which is why the division of the law into moral, civil and ceremonial has been almost universal for many years.

Bearmaster, the two great commandments spoken by our Lord were quoted directly out of the OT. And how do we love God? The answer is given in the first 4 commandments. And how do we love our neighbour? The answer is given in the last 6 commandments. Notice how Jesus did this in Matthew 19.18-19. He quoted 5 of the last 6 commandments and then concluded by summarizing them this way, "and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."

But, again, we know this instinctively. We know that loving God means putting away idols and reverencing His name and works. We know that loving neighbours includes everything listed in the last 6 commandments. So, we mustn't pit OT against NT. Everything about the NT is greater and the greater is that obedience and conformity to God's standards becomes easier (not harder!).

[Edited: we are debating two questions. First, are we under law in the NT? And second, is the Sabbath commandment to be applied to the Sunday or has it been abolished such that every day is the sabbath?]

Again here is the miracle of the work of regeneration:

///the Holy Spirit internally moves us to obey and delight in an external law. Everyone here at sermonindex would agree that there is an objective standard that is right and wrong and whether people know it or not is beside the point. So, there is nothing wrong with an external code. The homosexual ought not to practice homosexuality. The pedophile ought not to hurt children. The liar ought not to lie. But only the inward working of the Holy Spirit can make a homosexual not a homosexual and a pedophile not a pedophile and a liar not a liar - but you notice nothing happened to the external code!! What happened happened to the individual.

What I am noticing in discussions here is that people are saying there is something wrong with the external code. The Bible says, rather, the problem is in our hearts - and this is where God makes His people stand out as salt and light, by so changing them that their attitude to that external code becomes different. They respond to the "oughts" with "I want" - but please again remember the "oughts" haven't vanished. God hasn't changed, it is we who have changed.///

Edited: I will get back to you Sree. Thank you for what you said. I hope the conversation can continue and continuee in a spirit of humility and grace.

P
PaulWest

God makes His people stand out as salt and light, by so changing them that their attitude to that external code... They respond to the "oughts" with "I want" - but please again remember the "oughts" haven't vanished. God hasn't changed, it is we who have changed.

I agree with this insofar that the fulfilled external law is internalized within the believer. You say the Holy Spirit leads you to externally observe Sunday (the ought) as a "want" (please correct me if I misrepresent your conviction); others are led by the Holy Spirit, however, to a non-external observance of a Sabbath rest which is personified in the Person of Christ Jesus Himself. This is their "want" of God's "ought", and they can make a good case of it scripturally. The final end is that no one has the right to judge another brother or sister in how they are being led by the Holy Spirit to observe a Sabbath day, holiday, festival, feast, etc. It is between them and the Lord.

M
MaryJane

by PaulWest on 2013/11/6 13:53:54

God makes His people stand out as salt and light, by so changing them that their attitude to that external code... They respond to the "oughts" with "I want" - but please again remember the "oughts" haven't vanished. God hasn't changed, it is we who have changed.

I agree with this insofar that the fulfilled external law is internalized within the believer. You say the Holy Spirit leads you to externally observe Sunday (the ought) as a "want" (please correct me if I misrepresent your conviction); others are led by the Holy Spirit, however, to a non-external observance of a Sabbath rest which is personified in the Person of Christ Jesus Himself. This is their "want" of God's "ought", and they can make a good case of it scripturally. The final end is that no one has the right to judge another brother or sister in how they are being led by the Holy Spirit to observe a Sabbath day, holiday, festival, feast, etc. It is between them and the Lord.
_________


Amen!!

God bless
mj

S
sermonindex

Hi PaulWest,

You did not at all misrepresent me. I appreciate your post because I think it illustrates where the difference on this matter lies.

Here (it seems to me) is where we would differ - and it might help to look at some things we would agree on. We both recognize the "ought" of marriage between one man and one woman. And we recognize in the life of a believer that the Holy Spirit makes that "ought" a "want". The same is true of the first commandment. We ought not to worship idols. By the grace of God we don't want to, though we certainly do need to be reminded of the command and reminded of what idols can look like. We ought not to tell lies and by the grace of God we don't want to, though again we need to be reminded of the command and some of the implications.

So, what do we do when someone comes along and says "the Holy Spirit is leading me live a homosexual lifestyle?" Do we say "It is between them and the Lord?"

On the contrary, we take them to the Bible and urge them to repent. We insist that the leading or prompting they are 'feeling' must be tested and corrected by the Word of God. The same is true of the other commands. I may tell you that the Holy Spirit is leading me to leave my wife who I no longer enjoy. You would first point me to the "ought" of God's holy Word and then when I protested that it wasn't what I wanted you would say there is something wrong with my heart. If you were faithful as a friend and brother, you would not simply leave it between me and the Lord - because you are convinced on this point that there is an "ought".

Our hearts are deceitful things and must be checked by the Word of God. The debate here on this thread I think is on two different points. One, is there any "ought" any longer in the Christian life? Second, what is it?

I am saying yes to the first; and to the second, I am saying that the Sabbath is an ought. A holiday or festival or feast is another thing altogether, and I would be much more inclined to say it is between the individual believer and the Lord, but on this point of the Sabbath I am contending that as part of God's moral law (the 10 commandments) it is to be obeyed whether we want to or not... and if we don't want to we must admit the same here as we do on all other commandments, that the problem is rather our own hearts than the standard.

There are matters on which it is absolutely true that "the final end is that no one has the right to judge another brother or sister in how they are being led by the Holy Spirit," but on other matters that is not true at all. To argue that we mustn't judge on Sabbath observance is to argue that the commandment has been abrogated... and I am contending - as our forefathers did - that it hasn't been abrogated.

S
sermonindex

Brother if one is to be led by the Spirit to appeal to external writings to govern their conduct before God. Then it will be the New Testament. The Old Testament is a shadow whose laws and rules governed Israel. And that was external obedience.

We are governed not by the external code of the law of Mosex. But we are governed by the internal working of the Holy Spirit who has written His laws on our hearts and minds.

When a New Covenant believer appeals to external writings to confirm the Spirits leading in ethical matters. It will be the New Covenant writings that we call the New Testament.

Bearmaster.

S
sermonindex

Brothers having read and listened to the New Testament through several times. I see no evidence that believers are commanded to kweep a certain day as a Sabbath. If anything believers are enjoined to bind themselves to Jesus Christ who is their Sabbath rest. Our Sabbath is a Person and not a day.

Bearmaster.

P
PaulWest

First of all, I would like to thank you for your maturity, for your candor, for your level-headedness in discussing such an explosive topic such as this with rationale and grace. Bless you dear brother.

Now, to address your reply.

So, what do we do when someone comes along and says "the Holy Spirit is leading me live a homosexual lifestyle?" Do we say "It is between them and the Lord?"

I would hope not! Homosexuality is one of the things proscribed by God specifically in one of Paul's letters to the church in Corinth (I Cor. 6:9), where Paul states those who practice such wil not inherit the kingdom of God. To say the Holy Spirit is leading one to homosexuality, one can now legally say within context that the Holy Spirit may also lead a man to slander, to extort, to engage in thievery, to swindle, etc. (vs. 10 and 11). Where you can get into debate here is whether or not the person in question doubts the veracity of Pauline scripture.

A holiday or festival or feast is another thing altogether, and I would be much more inclined to say it is between the individual believer and the Lord, but on this point of the Sabbath I am contending that as part of God's moral law (the 10 commandments) it is to be obeyed whether we want to or not...

And again, I must appeal to Paul. In his letter to the Colossians (2:16) we read: "Let no one sit in judgment of you in matters of food, in drink, in matters of a feast day, or with regard to New Moon or Sabbath day."

I am actually very glad you brought up the homosexual issue concerning "Holy Spirit relativism", for in the same way Paul grouped homosexuality with all the other wicked practices which disqualify kingdom of God admittance (thus obliterating relativism in this category), so he also groups Sabbatarianism with all the other activities of which believers are tempted to sit in judgment upon others.

If I were to hand a New Testament to a Pygmie warrior in his native tongue to simply communicate the gospel of Jesus Christ so that he might come to salvific knowledge, do you think he will come away with a sudden compulsion to observe the Sabbath under a fear of displeasing the Father?


S
sermonindex

Thank you Paul for that. Every time I am tempted to be discouraged that others are not seeing things as I am, I am encouraged by the graciousness of those who disagree - so thanks Paul (and Bearmaster also!).

I want to acknowledge what you said here because I thought it was very well put:

///I am actually very glad you brought up the homosexual issue concerning "Holy Spirit relativism", for in the same way Paul grouped homosexuality with all the other wicked practices which disqualify kingdom of God admittance (thus obliterating relativism in this category), so he also groups Sabbatarianism with all the other activities of which believers are tempted to sit in judgment upon others.///

We would agree, then, that some practices disqualify kingdom of God admittance. Would we also agree that some sinful practices would not disqualify kingdom of God admittance? Is it is possible for a Christian to sin in ignorance?

I think Colossians is an important text to go to because Paul reasons that we should not allow others to judge us on these matters because (and the because is important!) they are "a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ." I actually like how the older translations translated the word 'sabbaths' rather than 'sabbath'. Every commandment came with positive commands that have been abrogated. With the 2nd commandment, for example, came the book of Leviticus. With the 5th commandment, for example, came the stoning of rebellious children. With the Sabbath commmand came additional sabbaths and feast days including for example the feast of the booths (see Leviticus 23; Numbers 28-29; Deuteronomy 16).

What Colossians is saying is that we are not to be judged on these feast days because they are shadows; and that includes the many additional sabbaths, but the sabbath itself is something else entirely. It was inscribed in stone along with the other commandments, was placed in the ark along with the other commmandments, was enjoined on the strangers in the midst of the camp (which other ceremonial laws were not) and was instituted before the fall and before there was need of shadows. Paul's words simply cannot be a reference to the command itself.

You added: ///If I were to hand a New Testament to a Pygmie warrior in his native tongue to simply communicate the gospel of Jesus Christ so that he might come to salvific knowledge, do you think he will come away with a sudden compulsion to observe the Sabbath under a fear of displeasing the Father?///

Brother, I think we ought to be careful that we do not judge the soundness of a particular doctrine or practice by the experiences of new believers. The way of salvation, Paul said, was known to Timothy from childhood; but there was still need of Paul and other authors of Scripture to urge their readers to go on to maturity and beyond the milk. I'm not sure what a pygmie warrior would conclude, but I do know that pygmie will need to be taught. God has appointed pastors and teachers for that very reason. Most of our elder brothers testify to discoveries they are still making 30 and 40 years into their walk.

When I went off to seminary it was to learn from scholars. I think we all believe there is at least some place for that kind of learning. I value scholarship, but I especially value the opinions of men thoroughly immersed in the Bible, who give themselves to much (!) prayer, and who are walking in godliness.

If a pygmie warrior did not reach the same conclusions that those godly praying studied men had reached I would sooner fault the pygmie warrior than the other men. (What I mean by fault is that I would urge him to go on praying, studying and obeying).

I want to assure you that by saying all this I am not pointing to myself (over against the pygmie warrior). Rather I am pointing to the evidence of church history which was once virtually unanimous on this point - and it was the godly, praying men who led the way. Virtually all the names we admire and respect (on all sides of our denominational divisions) until only recently... and we are not now at a high ebb spiritually.

Bearmaster, I believe that the OT saints were not as different as you are saying. Their obedience was external and internal (see the Psalms). The fact that they were given the two great commandments is evidence that their ethic and ours are not nearly so different as we make them out to be.

S
sermonindex

Thank you Stephen2 for the text from Ravenhill's sermon. I do not see where he is specifically stating that the day is on Sat., he only mentions the following: "Don't you pray for a loved or someone else when you are fooling around on Sundays and won't keep the sabbath. Some of you go to movies on Sunday night." This appears to imply he believed more in a Christian Sabbath, which is observed on Sunday. Your reasoning is definitely something that I am considering and searching the Scriptures to see if these things be so.

Interesting enough Charles Finney's sermon entitled "FALSE PROFESSORS" mentions the following about the sabbath:

"4. All that class are serving your own gods, who suppose that the six days of the week belong to yourselves and that the Sabbath only is God's day.

There are multitudes who suppose that the week is man's time, and the Sabbath only God's, and that they have a right to do their own work during the week, and to serve themselves, and promote their own interests, if they will only keep the Sabbath strictly and serve God on the Sabbath. For instance: A celebrated preacher, in illustrating the wickedness of breaking the Sabbath, used this illustration: "Suppose a man having seven dollars in his pocket should meet a beggar in great distress, and give him six dollars, keeping only one for himself, and the beggar, seeing that he retained one dollar, should turn and rob him of that; would not every heart despise his baseness?" You see it embodies this idea--that it is very ungrateful to break the Sabbath, since God has given to men six days for their own, to serve themselves, and only reserved the Sabbath to himself, and to rob God of the seventh day in base ingratitude.

You that do this do not serve God at all. If you are selfish during the week, you are selfish altogether. To suppose you had any real piety would imply that you were converted every Sabbath and unconverted every Monday. If a man would serve himself all the week and really possess religion on the Sabbath, he requires to be converted for it. But is this the idea of the Sabbath, that it is a day to serve God in, exclusive of other days? Is God in need of your Services on the Sabbath to keep his work along? God requires all your services as much on the six days as on the Sabbath, only he has appropriated the Sabbath to peculiar duties, and required its observance as a day of rest from bodily toil and from those fatiguing cares and labors that concern the present world. But because God uses means in accomplishing his purposes, and men have bodies as well as souls, and the gospel is to be spread and sustained by the things of this world, therefore God requires you to work all the six days at your secular employments. But it is all for his service, as much as the worship of the Sabbath. The Sabbath is no more given for the service of God than Monday. You have no more right to serve yourselves on Monday than you have on the Sabbath. If any of you have thus considered the matter, and imagined that the six days of the week are your own time, it shows that you are supremely selfish. I beg of you not to consider that in prayer and on the Sabbath you are serving God at all, if the rest of the time you are considered as serving yourself. You have never known the radical principle of serving the Lord" (http://www.gospeltruth.net/1836LTPC/ltpc02_fals_profsrs.htm).

You might like to READ from a brother who has a Jewish heritage, yet he is born again. I asked him about keeping the sabbath and he emailed me the following:

//(BEGINNING QUOTE) "Here is what Adonai has to say about Shabbat; not me, but He...

Here is The Commandment for the yearly, High Holy Shabbat:

"And this shall be for you a law FOREVER: In the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, you afflict your beings, and do no work, the native or the stranger who sojourns among you. "For on that day he makes atonement for you, to cleanse you, to be clean from all your sins before יהוה. "It is a Sabbath of rest for you, and you shall afflict your beings ”“ a law FOREVER. (Leviticus 16:29-31 ISR98)

...and again:

"You do no work ”“ a law FOREVER throughout your generations in all your dwellings. (Leviticus 23:31 ISR98)

...and here is the weekly Shabbat...--(7th day is NOT Sunday)

And יהוה spoke to Mosheh, saying, "Speak to the children of Yisra’Ä•l, and say to them, ‘The appointed times of יהוה, which you are to proclaim as holy gatherings, My appointed times, are these: ‘Six days work is done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of rest, a holy gathering. You do no work, it is a Sabbath to יהוה in all your dwellings. (Leviticus 23:1-3 ISR98)

So,

If scripture CLEARLY states FOREVER...and it is impossible for scripture to lie...then how could people dare say that Saturday's Shabbat suddenly shifted to Sunday?

HA! I mock the priests, priestesses, and prophets, and prophetesses of ba'al!!!

FOREVER MEANS FOREVER--that's that-- there is no argument at all-- end of story! And if ANYONE wishes to argue this, they are going against what is ETERNAL, they are going against God, they are going against The Messiah, The Lawgiver (Moses), and they are going against His Eternal Decree of Authority regarding His Election, because forever is FOREVER and I can neither say this nor stress this enough:

forever forever forever forever forever forever forever.

Why can't people see!?!?
Why can't people hear!?!?

What is wrong with the people?!?!

It is NOT found in new testament scripture that Shabbat was nullified or that it's day was changed! Why? Because it NEVER was! IT IS ETERNAL JUST LIKE HIM!

Here is why Brother...

It is because they are under STRONG DELUSIONS, as foretold in prophetic scripture concerning THIS VERY DAY--

Do we need any more proof that the blind simply cannot see?....if we need proof that Shabbat really is Saturday, all we need to do is look at the Hebrew calendar....The Hebrew calendar is NOT the Roman Gregorian calendar! The Hebrew calander is far more accurate, and is based on the solar cycle...it has been very constant for thousands of years--AMEN TO THAT!...Bless Israel!!! Bless the True Israel for being faithful in keeping proper time--HIS TIME!!!

Let this knowledge permeate your being with Wisdom. Go forward in The Spirit and stand against the abominations causing desolation, and stand against those who bear the mark of the beast in their minds & upon their right hand, who blindly cause perversity and nullify what is Eternal.

For it is written: His Name is blasphemed because of people like this!

Is this not all going down exactly as it's been foretold by the prophets regarding the last day?

Your servant In Messiah,--

These are His thoughts/ These are my thoughts/ These are The Spirits' thoughts: We are One.

The Shabbat, or Sabbath is Saturday. The Roman catholic church NEVER NEVER received permission to change that day to sunday. sunday is the first day of the week; therefore it is abominable and detestable unto God that THE 7th DAY OF REST be replaced by the first day, sunday, a day traditionally named by pagans, for pagans, who worshipped the sun: hence "day of the sun"

In Egypt the sun god was named 'ra'....

(--Lord please forgive me for mentioning the name of this Egyptian god, i referenced this foreign god to uncover the hidden Truth to those reading this--)

...very interesting because in Hebrew, the word 'ra' or 'רע' literally means evil or bad! THIS IS AN EVIL IN THE EYES OF THE LORD!

....check it for yourself!

When Messiah said; "those who break the least of "these" commands (commands of Torah) and teach other to do likewise will be least in the Kingdom." HE MEANT IT!

For instance....... I find it frightful that God our Father, for the good of His people, asked them to refrain from certain creatures as food, and yet He is mocked every day by false teachers... this is a ridiculous ongoing debate whereas people argue that Christ declared all foods clean...YEAH! FOODS THAT THE FATHER GAVE US PERMISSION TO EAT! Many people twist scripture and take little parts of it and read it for what they want it to be--so selfish... Having a form of religion but literally denying The Power thereof; His Authority. BUT I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT FOOD HERE! THIS IS A MATTER OF OBEDIENCE!

I don't know about anyone else, but for me, one who's set-apart unto God, i value every PRECIOUS decree that The Father commanded me through His Prophets, and my Brother Moses--The Torah. i value every PRECIOUS decree, without twisting, The Living Words, that The Father commanded me through His Messiah, my Brother, The King, The Lord Jesus Christ! Yes! He is my Brother!

I not only value His Commands, but I do them because I DEEPLY and SINCERELY Love His Majesty, The King. I might not be able to keep all of them perfectly, but I'm gonna keep doing my best to keep them because it is written: Be Holy because I am Holy."-- and i want to be Holy, and ALL OF THESE COMMANDS ARE THE WAYS AND MEANS TO BE HOLY WHETHER YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE--SPIRIT CONFESSED/APPROVED.

The only thing done away with at the cross was sacrificial ordinances. Why? BECAUSE CHRIST SHOWED US HOW TO BE A LIVING SACRIFICE! He came to show us how to live & love--LIFE--and YES, there is a huge difference between ordinances and laws! For as surely as The LORD lives, He said: "I did not desire your burnt offerings... I desire your compassion, obedience & Love." (1 Samuel15:22, Jerimiah 7:22&23, Hosae 6:6, Mark 12:33) READ IT!

WOW!-- Do you follow why The Lord wants all of us to hear and see in order that we might do!

This isn't about you or me. It's about HIM! Come on; all of you! Stop being so blind! Hear what He has to say!-- Not me! Not any man woman or child... Only Him and Him Alone!

So your being brought back to the Shabbat. The Shabbat was given, for us to rest. Messiah has become our rest. But to all of Israel and those who are grafted in, the Shabbat is a literal holiday; every 7th day. A day for you to rest and glorify your Father in Heaven יהוה (Bless His Name!) Do you truly love Him? For it was written: We remember and keep the Shabbat Holy.
____________________

I do as He asks of me and i am confused as to why others argue for their own cause and say, Christ did away with these precious commands.... WHAT A LIE OF SELFISH PRIDE AND UNREPENTANCE, FORMED WITHIN THE HEARTS AND MINDS OF THOSE MISGUIDED BY OUR ADVERSARY!

If your under this similar delusion, you've been deceived! I strongly recommend you ask The Master to reveal Truth to you, giving you eyes to see and ears to hear.

He is watching. I go forward to speak the truth because it is my charge to do so!

This is my oath before God, within His Body: Wake up those who sleep!

This is my oath unto you as your servant to bring you Truth and Good News.

I've been purchased with an awesome price-- I honor God with all my Heart, Soul, Mind & Stregnth!

And that's that...

We Love you,

--שבע" (END QUOTE)//

Wow, that's a lot to consider. Kenneth

A
a-servant

Paul the Apostle confirms the validity of the 10 commandments:

Ephesians 6:1  Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise;) That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth.

Romans 13:9  For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Is any of these commandments replaced by the person of Jesus Christ? No, not in reality, this is just a conclusion in people's mind, but not what is said in the Bible. A commandment is a commandment, and remains a commandment and not a person.

Read all of the Ephesians passage, the tone is clearly "DO it", not spiritualize or rationalize it away, the straight gate is always 'believe it' - 'do it', not 'theologize it' - people that specialize in that already missed it. The letter and the Spirit do not oppose each other - if they do one of the two is in error. Since you think it cannot be the spirit, it must be the letter. Paul rejects that notion in full in above 2 verses. You have to ignore him and rely on church traditions to fill the gap in order to believe the opposite what he said is true.

P
PaulWest

We would agree, then, that some practices disqualify kingdom of God admittance. Would we also agree that some sinful practices would not disqualify kingdom of God admittance? Is it is possible for a Christian to sin in ignorance?

Yes, brother, I believe there is a grand difference between a regenerate man who sins and repents and an unrengerate person who lives in the Adamic condition of natural, habitual sin (but that's another deep discussion!).

What Colossians is saying is that we are not to be judged on these feast days because they are shadows; and that includes the many additional sabbaths, but the sabbath itself is something else entirely.

Brother, why then doesn't Paul make this most crucial distinction in any of his epistles? I read abundantly of guidelines pertaining to the commemoration of the Lord's Supper, of the exercising of gifts, of the treatment of widows, of the qualifications of leadership, of the taking up of collections, but nowhere of a specific God-mandated "day" of observance under the New Covenant. Did the Greek Christians keep the Sabbath by default and hence there was no need for Paul to instruct them of it in his letters? How would they even know of the Sabbath, being former pagans? Surely, something this integral would be outlined by the Holy Spirit as to avoid future confusion in the pairing of verses like Col 2:16 and many others which instead seem to loose us from the OT-flavored external precepts of worship.
Brother, I think we ought to be careful that we do not judge the soundness of a particular doctrine or practice by the experiences of new believers. The way of salvation, Paul said, was known to Timothy from childhood; but there was still need of Paul and other authors of Scripture to urge their readers to go on to maturity and beyond the milk. I'm not sure what a pygmie warrior would conclude, but I do know that pygmie will need to be taught. God has appointed pastors and teachers for that very reason. Most of our elder brothers testify to discoveries they are still making 30 and 40 years into their walk.

Point taken. The idea behind the pygmie illustration was to demonstrate that without "added instruction" in quoting from an extraneous tome (The Old Testament) which would have no bearing upon the pygmie's salvation (that is, if he were regenerated prior to discovering who Moses and the Levites were), he would have no idea what Sabbath observance is, or even paying tithes for that matter. He would have to be taught Sabbath-keeping as an addition; that is, as a superfluous requirement of God. Can you imagine the confusion, if the new missionary (in Paul's day, likened unto Judaizers) now disclosed to the pygmie that God was still displeased with him because of a few unresolved issues which are to be found in another book, with the external designs of these obligations governed under a now obsolete covenant? While it is true the institution of the Sabbath predates the law, as does circumcision, both of these point inexorably to Christ where in Him they terminate physically only to convert to a new, living spiritual reality. Scripture portrayal is overwhelmingly detailed (particularly in Hebrews for the Sabbath; Philippians & Colossians for circumcision) in this regard, don't you think?

I believe the New Testament in and of itself is axiomatic. The Old Testament is essential for many things, but none of them are salvific in nature. I know we agree here! I see the creation, the flood, the history of Israel and Judah, the law and judges and kings and prophets all as a fulfilled microcosm to which we can enrich ourselves and learn from, as poignant illustrations and powerful spiritual allegories of the Reality of Jesus Christ and the practical working-out of the New Birth. But, again, there's nothing there for me to externally "do" to appease God. Everything God needs from me has already been fulfilled, internalized and satisfied in Christ. My willingness to perform for God now is propelled by the Holy Spirit, and the strength to accomplish it is provided by His grace.

Anyway, I hope some of this is making sense! Please let me know if my writing is getting too abstruse. Believe me, it wouldn't be the first time.

Paul


S
sermonindex

Hebrews 8:11
And they shall not teach everyone his fellowcitizen
And everyone his brother saying 'Know the Lord,'
For all will know me,
From the least to the greatest.

1 John 2:27
As for you, the anointing which you recieved from Him abides in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach you, but as His anointing teaches you about all tbings, and is true and is not s lie, and just as it has taught you, you abide in Him.

Mathew 23:8
But do not be called Rabbi (or teacher), for One is your Teacher and you are all brothers.
...........................................................
Brothers the above verses testify that the Holy Spirit has a teaching ministry in the New Covenant. The Holy Spirit dwells within each believer and if the believer has access to a New Testament then the Spirit will instruct them. This is the promise of Jesus to His disciples in John 14:26 and 16:13-15.

Thus the idea our Pygmy friend recieving a New Testament and reading it without instruction or comment from men will cone to the conclusion that one is not obligated under the New Covenant to keep a day as unto the Lord. But our Pygmy friend will ser that all days are alike as unto Christ and Jesus is our Sabbath Rest every day.

A friend of mine once remarked we do well to have our theology forged in the fires of persecution. For those persecuted brethren who have nothing more than the Holy Spirit and a New Testament do not see themselves enjoined to keep a Sabbath but rather joined to Him who is their Sabbath rest. Interesting this is what is taught in Hebrews 4 as this book was written in the context of persecution.

If we stay in the simplicity and purity of devotion to Jesus and His word we do well. The confusion arises in the minds of believers when men start teaching the shadow of the Old Covenant as binding New Testament truth.

Indeed I wonder what would happen if all we had were the New Testament and His Spirit to teach us? Would we not know more of Him who is the Truth to set us free.

Bearmaster.

S
sermonindex

Bearmaster, I think you have highlighted the fundamental difference between us (Paul see my answer to your post toward the bottom of this lengthy post - thanks):

///Indeed I wonder what would happen if all we had were the New Testament and His Spirit to teach us?///

First, we haven't got just the New Testament, and we were never meant to have just the New Testament. Think how outraged you would be if some pastor got up at a conference and cut out the book of Psalms because mostly written by an adulterer - and yet, you seem to want to operate without any of the Old Testament. Please correct me if I misunderstand you. If I were to have worded the question you posed I would have worded it like this, "I wonder what would happen if all we had were the Bible and His Spirit to teach us?"

Second, the other problem (as I see it) with what you have said here is that we are clearly told in Scripture that God has appointed some to preach and teach. It is an indictment according to Proverbs that the simple ones love their simplicity. Hebrews 6 says, "Therefore let us move beyond the elementary teachings about Christ and be taken forward to maturity,"

I would love to see a thread discussing how it is that we can know the truth. How many of us here at sermonindex are divided on various issues but convinced we are led by the Spirit? We are not all right...

I look back at the puritan age when men were spiritual giants, when most divines (as they were called) gave hours and hours to prayer each day and knew their Bibles (almost like the back of their hand!) and they were united on this question of the Sunday Sabbath. That doesn't make them right, but their opinion holds a great deal more sway over me then the recently converted pygmy (no offense meant in his direction!)

soldout2him, I have appreciated your posts, but I believe you have misunderstood me. I do not believe Saturday is the Sabbath anymore. Rather I hold to the Christian Sabbath or Lord's Day. So, I hold to what Ravenhill said in that quote.

Also, I think a-servant has quoted some valuable texts that should be weighed in this discussion.

Paul, you said

///Brother, why then doesn't Paul make this most crucial distinction in any of his epistles? I read abundantly of guidelines pertaining to the commemoration of the Lord's Supper, of the exercising of gifts, of the treatment of widows, of the qualifications of leadership, of the taking up of collections, but nowhere of a specific God-mandated "day" of observance under the New Covenant. Did the Greek Christians keep the Sabbath by default and hence there was no need for Paul to instruct them of it in his letters? How would they even know of the Sabbath, being former pagans?///

Paul, I think a lot of the differences between those of us posting on this thread and perhaps over on the other thread dealing with the difference between the new covenant and old covenant is a difference in hermeneutic (or how we even approach the Bible to begin interpreting it). Bearmaster's most recent post about the pygmy and the New Testament illustrates this. Jesus once said of marriage "What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." I would say the same of the Old and New Testaments. Under the influence of Darby in the 1800's and then Scofield and Chafer and Dallas seminary dispensationalism has spread and influenced the hermeneutic of many who don't know what dispensationalism is (and who might not want to be put in that camp... I'm not meaning to accuse you of being dispensational).

The dispensational hermeneutic has not been the predominant one in church history, but it has become predominant in the last 100 years (please forgive me if you know all this already!). This approach treats the New Testament as something entirely new and different and expects all its ethics to be derived from the New Testament rather than the Old.

The other approach (which is the one I take) is to see a newness about the new covenant that sees it as building on the old. It is a new administration of the same covenant of grace... but it is the same covenant of grace, the same law and the same mediator. This I realize is a discussion for another thread.

Back to your question: as Martyn Lloyd-Jones explained in his sermons on Romans, the question of days has to be understood in context. Today there is a debate about the Sabbath so we immediately think 'Sabbath', but in those days there was no such debate. There was the question of whether or not Saturday should also be kept (in addition to the Lord's Day) and whether new moons and extra sabbath days and weeks should be kept holy, but there was no question about the matter of the Lord's Day... and historians seem to be agreed that the Sunday was set apart from the very beginning as a special day for worship.

So when I come to Colossians in the 20th or 21st century with the cultural 'baggage' I have, I might be looking for Paul to say something about the Sabbath. But in those days Christianity was still considered an offshoot of judaism - they were still sorting out questions of consuming blood and circumcision because the people opened Paul's letters ASSUMING the Old! Today and because of dispensationalism people open up Paul's letters without assuming (and sometimes without even knowing the Old). I didn't even know there were other sabbaths until I began studying this question.

So I open up my NT assuming the Old and let the New tell me if (and where!) there are changes. I come to Colossians with the knowledge that there are new moons and extra sabbaths assuming that God's commandments are not to be abrogated (unless specifically told) and I find Paul saying the reason (!) we are not to be judged on new moons and sabbaths is because they are shadows and immediately I know what he is talking about. He's talking about the new moons and extra sabbaths because they were instituted under Moses in age of ceremonies and shadows, whereas the Sabbath itself was instituted before Moses, before Abraham, and before the fall - and so it cannot be a shadow! Hope that makes sense and I do apologize for the length of this post.


R
RogerB

Romans 7:1 the law has dominion over a man as long as he lives.

What we overlook: We died. As seen in Rom ch 5 & 6. The law has no dominion over a believer. He has been reconciled. He follows the teachings of Jesus. We can't put new wine in old skins. We have a new life now.


As far as the Sabbath, a careful reading of EX: Ch 20 does not say attend church on that day. I do read in the laws of the festivals that 3 times a year shall all the males appear before the Lord.

S
sermonindex

Thanks Roger for joining the conversation. Keep in mind Paul also says, "Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law."

He also said, "But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully."

That last verse is exactly why Paul sometimes seems to denigrate the law and other times seems to extol it. He will (in one passage) say that it has no dominion and then he will say (in another) that we do not make it void but actually establish it. The issue is how we use the law: lawfully or unlawfully.

When the law is treated as a means of justification it is used unlawfully and becomes a dreadful burden that no one can bear. However, when the law is used as a rule of life by the person who has been born again it becomes something in which it is possible to take great delight. Notice David in the Psalms.

The miracle of regeneration changes a man's attitude to the law - it doesn't remove the law. If you think about it, it is precisely the carnal nature of the unregenerate that when confronted by the holy standards of God's word and the character of a holy God they resist both the standard and God. They - as Reidhead put it - "love their sin and want to stay in it." See Romans 3.

When the Church today says that the Christian is no longer under the law (meaning there is no law) we play right into their hands. The carnal man can get behind that! There is a Christianity suited wonderfully for him! But the gospel doesn't do that. It confronts men in their sin with the message of the glory of Jesus Christ and offers them deliverance from sin; and what is deliverance from sin but deliverance into a life of holiness; and what is holiness but conformity to God's character as reflected in His law?

The miracle of regeneration is that it takes that mind, will, and heart of a man/woman who is dead set against (!) the law and makes that same person so different, so new, that he/she wants to do it. We are not under the law as a means to justification or as a way of salvation. And praise God, we can say with the John, the law isn't grievous anymore because we have been changed. And this is precisely what the gospel does.

Roger your concerns are shared by a number of others who have posted on this thread and it reveals I think precisely where some of us are differing.

I raised the subject of the 4th commandment, but I am realizing that we first need to have a discussion about the law.

H
Heydave

Stephen, you state that the law of the Sabbath is part of God's moral law. I can see that you would say this because it is one of the '10 commandments'. I'm trying to understand how it is 'moral' when we see how Jesus Himself spoke about it as I previously posted. Maybe you can explain why you think it is a moral obligation.

No one I know would say that the other 9 commandments are ones we can ignore and that these should something we naturally want to do and keep. However the Sabbath commandment seems to be so different to the others to us.

One other point you made I want to question is that you say that the Sabbath pre-dates the law of Moses and goes back to creation. That being so it is called the seventh day (Saturday), but you now say it is the Sunday (1st day) which is a contradiction with your fist point.

S
sermonindex

Hebrews 1:1-2
God, after he spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets and many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us by His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the world.

Hebrews 8:6
But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, buy as much as He is the mediator of a bettrr covenant, which has been enacted on better promises.

Hebrews 7:12
For where the priesthood is changed, of necessity there takes place a change of law also.
.......................................................................................................
Saints a reading of the book of Hebrews shows we are under a New Covenant of which Jesus is the mediator. The New Covenant is not built upon the Okd Covenant. Nor is the New Covenant a continuation of the Okd Covenant. Not is there one super covenant of grace as our Presbyterian friends would argue.

Indeed Hebrews 8:13 would argue that the New Covenant is separate and new. The New Covenant has made the Old Covenant obsolete. The Old Covenant will disappear. The law will disappear.

We are under a New Covenant adminstered and mediated by Jesus Christ. His sacrificial death on the cross established the New Covenant. His Spirit governs the New Covenant. Jesus. and not Moses is our teacher. Because of this. Believers in Jesus need only the New Testament to guide them by His Spirit.

Bearmaster.

H
Heydave

Bearmaster ,

Jesus said in Matt 5:17 -18 "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
"For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled."

In Hebrews 8:13 it says "In that He says, "A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away."

So we have to keep these two things and understand them. Extremes on either side are wrong. It is wrong to say we only need the New Testament.

Why is the old obsolete (as it says in Hebrews). It is not because it was at fault, but we (mankind) are at fault in that we cannot keep it. See the point earlier in Hebrews 8:7-8

"For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second".

"Because finding fault with them, He says: "Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah”” "

It says 'finding fault with THEM, not finding fault with the law.

So yes, we now serve God under the New Covenant of the Spirit, but we do NOT forsake the law, Christ fulfils it in us as we walk by the Spirit. If we walk by the flesh we are lawbreakers.

The law was made for the lawbreakers. Those who keep the law, don't need a law (1 Tim 1:9), BUT they do keep the law because it is written on their hearts.

S
sermonindex

Heydave, I have appreciated very much the tone of your posts. Thanks!

You said, ///No one I know would say that the other 9 commandments are ones we can ignore and that these should something we naturally want to do and keep.///

Exactly! Though I do think that the Church ought to stop
and re-think the second commandment. I read something in the gospel fellowships handbook about visualizing at the communion table, and unless I misunderstand the author that sounds like a breach of the 2nd commandment - will save that for another thread perhaps.

The point you make is important and it feels uncomfortable even saying there are just 9 commandments...

Though I understand most who disagree with me would say that we obey the Sabbath now every day rather than on just one day, which sounds more spiritual, but their 7 days are just like my 6 days - they are given to worship, work and sometimes play - whereas I have a day on top of that that is special and on which work and play are cleared out of the schedule, so I can devote all of it to my chief joy, which ought to be enjoying God (ed: I feel like a child boasting in a new toy. Forgive me please if this comes across as proud - but I do feel so blessed to have 6 days like so many others in the church but a special day on top of that)

I would argue that the Sabbath command is a part of the moral law based on a number of things:

First, it was given before the fall (so before there was need of shadows! So Colossians cannot apply). We can discuss the day as a secondary point, but the first thing to establish is that the commandment which requires us to give a day particularly to God, which requires us to set it aside from common use (as we do the Lord's Supper) is perpetual.

Second, it is included in the list of 10 commandments inscribed by the finger of God on the stone tablets and put in the ark... whereas other feast days and sabbaths were not - just as rules about stoning children and rules about ritual cleansing were not (and which also weren't required until after the fall)

Third, it is a major theme among the prophets who seemed at times to talk as if the ceremonial law didn't matter. They would tell the people how God hated their feasts, etc; but then, while rebuking the people for their idolatry also frequently rebuked them for breaking the Sabbath, which was often linked to the first commandment. And if you think about it they do go hand in hand. What keeps most people from giving an entire day specially to worship? It is usually an idol - something they would rather be doing than worshipping. Say football for example.

Fourth, the New Testament texts which some have understood as repealing the Sabbath are dealing with the ceremonial days.

Fifth, Jesus took great care to correct the Pharisaical treatment of the day precisely because the commandment is important and perpetual. Have you ever noticed how in John 20 Jesus specifically visited the disciples on the first day of the week and then again on the first day of the week.... they didn't see him in between... interesting isn't it that the Lord's Day is named after the one who claimed to be Lord of the Sabbath?!

Sixth, you asked about the text in which Jesus said the Sabbath was made for man. I have a written a booklet (though it is not yet - if it ever will be - published) in which I write,

///What does it say about the North American Church that she hears Jesus saying "the Sabbath was made for man (Mark 2.27)” and assumes He must have been freeing us from worship? He offers a gift. He says, in effect, "I have something wonderful for you - even designed for you” and the very people who bear His name determine from those same words that He cannot mean for us to have a Sabbath ”“ otherwise, we reason, it wouldn’t be for us. A quick survey of history convinces me that the Church has drifted very far from her moorings, and the reason is almost certainly the idolatry now on display Sunday after Sunday.///

Hope this helps somewhat. Let me know.

Bearmaster, I will get back to you in a bit. Thanks for your thoughts on this too.

Edit: For those of you have read some of this thread I would encourage you to dig further into the question of the Sunday Sabbath - recognize that almost all the deceased speakers who's sermons you are listening to at SI held to the Sunday Sabbath, and that list includes Leonard Ravenhill. Check out the following reads, http://www.christianbook.com/lords-are-you-spending-this-sunday/joey-pipa/9781857922011/pd/22018?product_redirect=1&Ntt=22018&item_code=&Ntk=keywords&event=ESRCP.
And, http://www.christianbook.com/worship-assessing-christian-life-light-sabbath/ryan-mcgraw/9781601781550/pd/781550?product_redirect=1&Ntt=781550&item_code=&Ntk=keywords&event=ESRCP.
And on Robert Murray M'Cheyne, http://www.bookdepository.com/Robert-Murray-MCheyne-Andrew-Bonar/9780851510842.

G
ginnyrose

I find this topic wearisome...I am not so sure but what this topic creates greater division among SI posters then anything else.

What I find disturbing is that Believers throughout the ages believed it essential for them to observe the LORD's day as first observed by Adam and Eve, and later by the early church, but today will discount its worthiness.

Does the testimony of the saints in the past not have something to teach us? The modern church considers it a non-essential and where are they at spiritually? They focus on self, self improvement and is that not what 'Sabbath-breaking'* is all about? Living for self?

Hate to get involved in doctrinal discussions but the this topic grieves me.

ginnyrose


*Or, Lord's day

G
ginnyrose

Opps! Made an error. The sabbath was first observed by God. He worked six days and rested the seventh. It is from this example that Believers have in the years since observed it as well.

If God who is Almighty needed to rest, we as finite beings need it all the more.

I find resting one day a week from my normal routine to be a rich blessing. Thank-you, Lord.

ginnyrose

S
sermonindex

Brother must make this my final post as I am getting ready for a trip (David Ravenhill meeting in OK). John 1:16 and 17 tells us of His fullness we have all recieved. For the law came through Moses. But grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ. Indeed 2 Peter 3:18 tells us we are to grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord Jezus Christ.

The sum total of God's revelation was not revealed to Moses on Sinia. But the some total of God's revelation was revealed on Calvary in His Son Jesus Christ. Indeed it is Jesus in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. Not Moses. Thus one will never pmumet the full riches found in Jesus.

Must stand down. Lord willing maybe can join this thread another time

Bearmaster.

S
sermonindex

Heydave, I hope you that you will find my response to your questions [ed. its a couple posts back]

Bearmaster, I wonder if we should have a separate discussion about the place of the law in another thread? Perhaps when you get back? Some of the differences coming out in this discussion have more to do with our understanding of the law than the 4th commandment.

Reposting:

For those of you have read some of this thread I would encourage you to dig further into the question of the Sunday Sabbath - recognize that almost all the deceased speakers (or saints who have passed into glory!) whose sermons you are listening to at SI held to the Sunday Sabbath, and that list includes Leonard Ravenhill. Check out the following reads,

http://www.christianbook.com/lords-are-you-spending-this-sunday/joey-pipa/9781857922011/pd/22018?product_redirect=1&Ntt=22018&item_code=&Ntk=keywords&event=ESRCP.

And, http://www.christianbook.com/worship-assessing-christian-life-light-sabbath/ryan-mcgraw/9781601781550/pd/781550?product_redirect=1&Ntt=781550&item_code=&Ntk=keywords&event=ESRCP.

And on Robert Murray M'Cheyne, http://www.bookdepository.com/Robert-Murray-MCheyne-Andrew-Bonar/9780851510842.

Edit: Ginnyrose, I don't know the history of this subject at SI, but I have been grateful for the tone of the conversation on this thread. There is a certainly a divide, but by God's grace more brothers and sisters will come to rejoice in the Sabbath - in the meantime its the kind of division that is necessary.

H
Heydave

Stephen,

Yes I did read your response. I suppose it comes down to how each one works out what 'keeping a Sabbath' means to them in practical outworking. That's why I was interested in how you kept the day. The problem with the religious leaders in Israel in the time of Christ (and also the same in church the age) is that they wanted to make a whole list of can and can't do things and bind them onto the people. This is what Christ challenged and spoke against in the gospel accounts.

In simple terms we are told to cease from our normal work commitments (this is to our benefit) as a special day unto the LORD. There is a lot of scope in this for everyone to work this out for themselves without being given 'laws' of what they can and can't do.


P
PaulWest

The problem with the religious leaders in Israel in the time of Christ (and also the same in church the age) is that they wanted to make a whole list of can and can't do things and bind them onto the people.

This is precisely the issue. Once legislation is made that commands followers of Christ to "keep" a Christian Sabbath, a Pandora Box is opened unto the legal definition of "keep". Can you do your laundry? Can you take your child to a hospital. Can you go to a restaurant? Turn on the TV? Any answer given must be relegated to an opinion of conviction, otherwise you, as a servant, are deigning to speak in the place of the Holy Spirit into the life of another servant. What makes your personal conviction legally binding upon another man in this area?

The point I am trying to make is we must define "keep", and once we define it it is then impossible to blanket legislate this definition. One brother may think that "keeping" the Christian Sabbath precludes watching any TV, for example. Another brother has total liberty to watch a game after going to church. One sees it as going to a church building in a corporate setting; another stays home and watches Charles Stanley. Who is right?

This sort of thing is totally incongruent with the liberty we have under the New Covenant in Christ to worship God in spirit and truth. And this is the problem with the legislation of externals. A man was commanded by God to be put to death in the OT for carrying sticks on the Sabbath; Jesus, however, told a man to carry his bed on another Sabbath (a lesson in externals for sure). The misunderstanding of the Sabbath, in fact, was a huge reason the religious people wanted Jesus dead. He didn't "keep" the Sabbath according to the current legislative mode of observance.

Of course, when the Sabbath rest is spiritualized in Christ Jesus as I believe New Testament scripture overwhelmingly illustrates, the argument of the external details of the "how to observe" immediately evaporate.

S
sermonindex

Paul, good to have you back in the conversation. I would argue that the problem of the pharisees wasn't a list of do's and don'ts per se. God has given such a list. Their problem was how they approached that list.

First, they treated it as a means of becoming justified before God (ie. works salvation).

Second, they focused merely on the externals and failed to recognize [ed: their need] to obey the law not only in letter but in spirit.

So, as a married man there are some things I must never do and there are things I must do (do's and don'ts); but if the success of my marriage depends on my carrying that list around and checking items off then there's a problem. The problem isn't the list its me... I should want to do those things, and I should want what's at the back of the list... I should be driven to do what is on the list by the love I have for my wife, but I should never excuse my failure to do what's on the list by saying "oh, but I love her".

So we come to the Ten Commandments and begin to see as Jesus taught that there is something at the back of it: love for God and love for our neighbour.

We look at the Pharisees and realize they were obsessed with the letter to the point that they added to the command what wasn't even there and lost sight of the spirit of the thing - but the problem was never the commandment itself! If you love me, said Jesus, you will obey my commands.

Let's take adultery for example. Neither one of us is troubled by the pandora box that has opened (as you expressed it). Rather, we start with the principle and prayerfully and under the guidance of the Spirit speaking through the Word we begin to apply it. What should I watch? How should I dress? How should I relate to women (and women to men)? What does purity look like? - and this raises hosts of questions that get debated in places like this, but none of us sees this as a threat to our liberty!

Our liberty is liberty from sin! And it our joy to seek to be made like Jesus, to be holy as he is holy.

The first thing to sort out is whether or not God's command is binding.

As a Christian am I free to lie? No, on the contrary, I am free FROM the sin of lying. That liberty I have in Christ will not lead me into a life of dishonesty; rather I will begin to live a life of truth telling... and once I have come to the conclusion that I am not to tell lies questions will be raised as in 'should I tell a lie to save someone's life' etc... but, again, none of that is incongruent with the liberty we have in Christ.

As I have sought to apply the Sabbath I have started as Ravenhill did with Isaiah 58. There it says that I am to put aside my own personal pleasures and words and works so that I may delight in God... so I have a principle ,and I seek to apply it. We're not all agreed, and debates are had among those who hold to the Sabbath but I would insist this is not incongruent with my liberty. Now that I understand the purpose of the Sabbath it is a joy to me. I found it hard at first as revealed my idols to me but now I look forward to it.

Jesus nowhere told them not to keep but He did correct their false understanding of the Sabbath. We are, I think, having two conversations. One is over the nature of our liberty in Christ (freedom from the law vs. freedom from sin) and one is over the Sabbath and whether it is spiritualized... I would suggest in order to spiritualize the Sabbath you would have to assume the Old Testament is a closed and irrelevant book when you open your NT. (edit: brother I don't mean this as an accusation directed at you or anyone else. It is how it seems to me, but I would love for you to correct me if I have misunderstood you).

Stephen

I am reposting something I wrote earlier that may help with what you find to be the overwhelming evidence that the Sabbath has been spiritualized...

///Back to your question: as Martyn Lloyd-Jones explained in his sermons on Romans, the question of days has to be understood in context. Today there is a debate about the Sabbath so we immediately think 'Sabbath', but in those days there was no such debate. There was the question of whether or not Saturday should also be kept (in addition to the Lord's Day) and whether new moons and extra sabbath days and weeks should be kept holy, but there was no question about the matter of the Lord's Day...

So when I come to Colossians in the 20th or 21st century with the cultural 'baggage' I have, I might be looking for Paul to say something about the Sabbath. But in those days Christianity was still considered an offshoot of judaism - they were still sorting out questions of consuming blood and circumcision because the people opened Paul's letters ASSUMING the Old! ...

So I open up my NT assuming the Old and let the New tell me if (and where!) there are changes. I come to Colossians with the knowledge that there are new moons and extra sabbaths assuming that God's commandments are not to be abrogated (unless specifically told) and I find Paul saying the reason (!) we are not to be judged on new moons and sabbaths is because they are shadows and immediately I know what he is talking about. He's talking about the new moons and extra sabbaths because they were instituted under Moses in age of ceremonies and shadows, whereas the Sabbath itself was instituted before Moses, before Abraham, and before the fall - and so it cannot be a shadow!///

R
RogerB

The law can't die. It still convicts people who haven't believed. It's not void

Christ made it possible for us to die through baptism. Then the OT law has no authority over the new believer. But we come under an even higher authority when we believe. We must continually examine ourselves as we commune with Christ. We must come together as friends and listen to his instructions like children in a household. Paul said he pushed on and din't want to be a castaway from neglecting the words of Christ.

The law was never grievous, It was the penalty standing there that was grievous. If people love their sins they will err.

Jesus established the law and made it honorable. He went into the synagogue and cleared out the money changers. In the pharisees eye it was just an office. In Jesus eyes there was zeal for what the Father established.

God made Adam a wife, perfect in every way. Likewise The Father is making a bride for his son. He doesn't want her under the penalty of death like a slave. She has been reconciled. The children of God are free in the house of God. We're not bound to a penalty.

We have 2 new commands in the NT. Love God with all your heart and soul and Love your neighbor as self. The second one is the hardest. Harder than the 10 commands.It gets into racism, work, who we talk too, who we vote for and support. We don't want to support killing our brother in another nation.

Leave with a question. How can you be reconciled unless you were once at peace with one another?

S
sermonindex

Hi, Roger. You said: ///We have 2 new commands in the NT. Love God with all your heart and soul and Love your neighbor as self. The second one is the hardest. Harder than the 10 commands.It gets into racism, work, who we talk too, who we vote for and support. We don't want to support killing our brother in another nation.///

Those two commands were not new to the NT. The first command, to love God, comes straight out of Deuteronomy 6. The second, to love our neighbour, comes straight out of Leviticus 19. It is those two commandments that were (and are) at the back of the 10 commandments, and it was the pharisees who had lost sight of that.

The pharisees as I said in the previous post treated the commandments as a means of becoming justified before God (ie. works salvation). And, they focused merely on the externals and failed to recognize their need to obey the law not only in letter but in spirit.

I'll repost something that I think gets to the core of this thing,

///... as a married man there are some things I must never do and there are things I must do (do's and don'ts); but if the success of my marriage depends on my carrying that list around and checking items off then there's a problem. The problem isn't the list its me... I should want to do those things, and I should want what's at the back of the list... I should be driven to do what is on the list by the love I have for my wife, but I should never excuse my failure to do what's on the list by saying "oh, but I love her".

So we come to the Ten Commandments and begin to see as Jesus taught that there is something at the back of it: love for God and love for our neighbour.

We look at the Pharisees and realize they were obsessed with the letter to the point that they added to the command what wasn't even there and lost sight of the spirit of the thing - but the problem was never the commandment itself! If you love me, said Jesus, you will obey my commands.

Let's take adultery for example. Neither one of us is troubled by the pandora box that has opened (as you expressed it). Rather, we start with the principle and prayerfully and under the guidance of the Spirit speaking through the Word we begin to apply it. What should I watch? How should I dress? How should I relate to women (and women to men)? What does purity look like? - and this raises hosts of questions that get debated in places like this, but none of us sees this as a threat to our liberty!

Our liberty is liberty from sin! And it our joy to seek to be made like Jesus, to be holy as he is holy.

The first thing to sort out is whether or not God's command is binding.

As a Christian am I free to lie? No, on the contrary, I am free FROM the sin of lying. That liberty I have in Christ will not lead me into a life of dishonesty; rather I will begin to live a life of truth telling... and once I have come to the conclusion that I am not to tell lies questions will be raised as in 'should I tell a lie to save someone's life' etc... but, again, none of that is incongruent with the liberty we have in Christ.///

Roger I'm not sure I understand your question at the end of your post. Is that a reference to what Paul says in Ephesians 2?

P
PaulWest

Stephen, instead of me going into great hermeneutical detail and making this a tremendous bore for everyone, I would just like to keep it simple and straightforward (I say this for myself; you have been very straightforward).

You speak of the working out of "do not commit adutery" as never being a pandora box, and I agree. The same with being set free from the sin of lying. These are issues the Holy Spirit tackles at the internal root, writing the law of God on the heart. Idols are exposed; hatred becomes murder; fantasy becomes adultery. The Holy Spirit empoweres us to take all these illegal thoughts captive through submission. In other words, spiritual consideration takes care of carnal manifestations.

But now we come to outward Sabbath observance and we conspicuously find no spiritual consideration (or so the Sabbatarians say). The outward must still be manifested - and, not only that, even legislated as to what externally can be done lawfully and what must be avoided. Like I said in my previous post, for some, the television must remain off on the Lord's Day. Others do not do their laundry. Some brethren will not go to a restaurant (because Christians should not be responsible for other people to have to go to work on the Sabbath), yet these same would bring their child to an emergency room on the Sabbath if needed. Some equate Sabbath observance to dressing up and going to church; others say home in their pyjamas and watch Charles Stanley on TV. Who is the true observer? All of them? None of them? This is just the beginning of the issues you get into when you try to put new wine into an old wineskin. I must respectfully maintain that imposing an outward observance of any day or ritual, feast, festival (weekly sabbath included) is totally incongruent with New Covenant grace.

To even begin to clear this up, again brother, you must define "keep" in a physical sense (and from where you acquired these rules) and then show from scripture how this ritual of "keeping" must become universal for all other followers of Jesus Christ.

Dear brother, I feel if you can answer these two questions openly we can really begin to make headway.

God bless

S
sermonindex

Brother Paul it has been a joy to read over your thoughtful responses.

Let me try to answer those two questions.

A. First, I would say that when it comes to Sabbath observance there is absolutely a spiritual consideration and that spiritual consideration is at the back of the command. Always we begin with loving God, and now I come to the reality of my life and find myself in a cycle of work, play and worship (I realize we can worship at work and sometimes at play but I am speaking of the intentional act of communing with God through the word, through prayer and through praise)...

But to that reality God brings the Sabbath. Now, we can talk all day about what I can and cannot do, but what is the purpose of the day? The purpose of the day is that I might delight in God, and incredibly the promise of Isaiah 58 is that if I would set other things aside so that I may delight in Him the promise is I WILL!

How many of us have complained there isn't enough time to worship and pray and study the Word of God? Many don't feel they have time to sit down with their family and worship together - so God gives His people a day to set aside the ordinary things so that we may enjoy Him. To the carnal man this is going to come across as a burdensome (even legalistic) command, but to the believer this is going to come across as a precious gift (which is how Jesus put it).

So the externals of the Sabbath command are to free me to give attention to spiritual duties. The command is not observed by doing what the Pharisees did: simply ceasing from certain things. The command is also positive. If some things are to be put aside it is SO THAT we can delight ourselves in the Lord, SO THAT we can go to worship twice (or three times or all day long) on Sunday and focus on Him in between. If I understand the principle that solves a lot of questions of application.

When my father used to give me the key to the car so that I could visit the girl (who would later become my wife) I had no trouble sorting out the application - and it was a joy to do so! I instantly put down whatever I was doing, took the car and spent the day with her. When God gives us the Sabbath its like my father giving me the key to the car...

If I really do love Him and desire Him as I say I do every other day of the week, if there are no idols in my life, then this is an opportunity I am going to seize, and its quite simple: just as I might have put down my video game to take the car to see my soon to be wife, so on Sunday I am going to put down recreation to be with my beloved. And Isaiah 58 tells us that this is precisely what we are to do. We put aside all play and all work that is not absolutely necessary for Him.

You raised the emergency room example - that, I think, is a beautiful example of how Jesus corrected the pharisees understanding of the Sabbath. The day was made for man - so of course it is a day for mercy and necessary work (Doctors, policemen, firefighters, nurses, etc.).

But Paul, the question isn't whether the application of the Sabbath command is difficult or not. All the commands are tough to apply at times, and there is always some measure of debate. The question is whether the command is still binding - which is your second question.

B. So, second, I would ask you is it incongrous with New Covenant grace to impose upon people the obligations of the other 9 commandments? I trust you will say 'no'. They must do them, and if they are new creatures they will want (!) to do them.

So in order for you to conclude that the 4th commandment is also still binding what are you looking for? When you come to the NT are you assuming that the whole of the Old is done away with so that you are looking for a new system of ethics to be spelled out OR do you come to the NT assuming that the principles of the Old remain true? I come to the New and find the same two commmandments: love God and love neighbour and I find people like Abraham believing God's promise and be counted righteous through faith alone rather than through faith plus works. There are wonderful differences and a glorious newness about the new covenant, but I assume God's standards in the old are going to carry over unless told otherwise...

And of course we are clearly and very plainly told that the shadows and types of the Old have all passed away because fulfilled by the person of our Saviour Jesus. In other words all that was given us in the Old to picture Christ is put away very naturally because there is no need of it any longer.

The question, then, is whether the 4th commandment is one of those shadows/pictures. The other 9 aren't. So then we come to Colossians 2 where it says that we are not to be judged on certain things including new moons and sabbaths BECAUSE they are shadows. Now if I didn't know that there were other sabbaths that came with the new moon and other feast days in that Mosaic law I would come to Colossians 2 and be in a bit of a quandry. Why didn't God treat the Sabbath like a ceremonial law in the Old Testament if it is being treated like that in the New? Why was it included in the 10, why put it in the ark, why such a focus among the prophets on this thing (along with idolatry) when these same prophets at the very same time were highly critical of the people's observance of the ceremonial laws? And why if it was a shadow was it sanctified before the fall and before, then, there was need of shadows?

But, you see, we know about the other sabbaths. The very same prophet who repeatedly (!) urged Sabbath obedience also said "Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto me; the new moons and sabbaths [sounds just like Colossians], the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting (Isaiah 1)." Not only did the prophets never call any of the other commandments vain they never (!) called the Sabbath itself vain; and this same prophet went on repeatedly to rebuke the people for breaking the Sabbath!

In the Church today we seem to come to the NT as if we didn't have the Old. We want things to be spelled out in the New all over again, but God is the same!

The key I think to this whole puzzle is sorting out the newness of the new covenant. Hebrews is very clear about what is put away: the whole of the ceremonial system is finished because it was given ONLY to point to the work and person of the coming Messiah.

And so of course Paul says what he says about feast days and additional sabbaths - they were all part of that ceremonial system... but the Sabbath itself is separate from that system (even as the commandment to honour parents is separate from the judicial law that reqired stoning of children who were rebellious).

Hebrews tells us in chapter 4 that we have entered into the rest of Christ; but then in verse 9 the author uses a different word to say 'rest' when he says "there remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God." The word used here (but not in the previous part of this letter) is the word Sabbath not the usual word for rest. The [edit: author] is telling us that even as we have entered into the rest of the Lord Jesus Christ and await our future rest in glory, there remains a Sabbath!

Let me know if this is making sense and how I can clarify.

Edit: And I want to clarify, too, that these are not my answers or the answers of a particular denomination. These are the answers that have been given to the church for centuries by men like Robert Murray M'Cheyne and Spurgeon and Lloyd-Jones and Duncan Campbell.

P
PaulWest

Dear brother, just a few things (you gave me a lot of substance to sort through!) For now, let me remark on:

I come to the reality of my life and find myself in a cycle of work, play and worship (I realize we can worship at work and sometimes at play but I am speaking of the intentional act of communing with God through the word, through prayer and through praise)...

Was this not the essential reason for the Jewish Sabbath to begin with? 6 days of work, play, rudimentary aknowledgement of God (prayers before meals, bedtime, giving thanks, etc.) and then the intentional day to cease all irreligious, secular activity and focus exclusively on God? A time to blow the shofars and dance and do the externals?

How is this different from the legislation of the Christian Sabbath? Is "willingness and joy" to observe it the only differentiating factor between the Jew and the Christian? If so, my willingness is to rest and blow the shofar and dance seven days a week in Jesus. If the opportunity presents itself, I will also meet with other believers (Sunday, Wednesday, Friday - it makes no difference externally) to fellowship. Man's tradition has since designated the Christian Sabbath to fall on Sunday (even having been enforced by a puritanic sword at times). The danger of putting new wine in an old skin.

I must admit, dear brother, I was a bit disappointed by you not answering the question about what specific details are involved with "keeping" the Sabbath in your view. And I think you're being shrewd (wise) by not answering because you know you'll be trapped in a corner ;) It's suicide.

(Edit)P.S. Just to reiterate that I am writing this with nothing but love, respect and grace toward you. I am not looking to score a win or convert you over to the non-sabbatarian side. Hatching these things out help enrich my own walk and give me a greater understanding of why I hold to the things that I do. And it helps me better understand the mature and intelligent opposition.

Respectfully yours,

Brother Paul


P
PaulWest

On a lighter note, brother, I see you endorse Bonar's Memoirs on McCheyne. I own a copy of RMM's pastoral letters. These were little bits of corresponance McCheyne wrote to his congregation during a forced absence. They are fantastic. I also have the collection of A.W. Pink's letters to young believers who had specific questions about his "Studies in the Scriptures" magazine articles. Something tells me you're a guy with a taste for the spiritual gourmet. You would love these brother (if you don't have them already).

Paul

S
sermonindex

Let me start with the 'suicide' bit - and be assured, I say it with a smile... though I do hesitate to describe some of the things I do because does seem like pride on display - I say it then only because you have repeatedly [ed. even if nicely] asked.

Physical details:

A. I don't do house chores or yard chores. I do actively encourage others to tell their employer (assuming they are not doing a work of necessity) they cannot work and then accept the loss of job if it comes to that. I don't go to restaurants or stores or gas stations so that others may rest as well as me.

B. I don't watch television or listen to the radio or read the news or fiction... in fact, I have decided to stop reading theology and now read only books that draw me into communion with Christ. We don't play games or sports or other kinds of play - though we do sometimes play with the children in a very directed way like acting out Bible stories, etc. We want the day to be a joyful day for them.

Those are the don'ts, but remember the don'ts of any command are so that we can DO what we were meant to. There are physicals to all the commands.

I don't understand what it is about the physicals that has you troubled. The physical of the 7th commandment is that I must not take another woman (other than my wife) into my bed. Is that all that the command requires? Of course not - so it is with the Sabbath: there are physical and spiritual requirements.

It won't do for us to pretend that we are honouring the 7th command by not lusting in our hearts when we are taking someone into our bed. I may loudly protest that in the new covenant what matters is the heart not what I watch on television... but you and I know better than to talk like that. So why make an exception with the 4th command? What would you think if I told you that I love nothing more than I love God, but I go to the mosque and I watch 10 hours of television a day. You wouldn't hesitate to point out that the externals reveal something about what is inside. But getting to the internals doesn't free us from considering what's outside.

I hope, for example, that your pastor challenges you not only to love the Lord, but also to be careful how much television you are watching (and internet you are using!). I am to love God, but that love is often only seen in the externals.

Brother, in one sense there is no difference from the Sabbath (except for a change in the day). Some of the rigour of the Old I think is put away (but we can debate that)... but the command is the same, just as its still wrong lie and steal and murder. Why do we need a change in the command when we come to the New?

You said, ///If so, my willingness is to rest and blow the shofar and dance seven days a week in Jesus. If the opportunity presents itself, I will also meet with other believers (Sunday, Wednesday, Friday - it makes no difference externally) to fellowship.///

Isn't this you saying you know better than God? [ed. I hope this will be received in the gentle spirit in which I mean it] Yes, you should be willing to worship every day. Yes, you should meet other believers Wednesday and Friday too! And if you want to put aside all recreation because entertainment is the devil's substitute for joy (as Ravenhill said) I would have no objection.

But, brother, you still have to work all those other days. There's laundry and dishes and lawn care and grocery shopping and the list could go on...

On this day we are doing something different. Its not the only day we worship - just as it wasn't the only day the Jews were to worship. They (the Jews!) were to love God with all their heart mind and soul. It doesn't get any higher than that in the NT! Still, God in His wisdom said He wanted them to set aside the Sabbath from ordinary use.

In a way its like you and I deciding we want to remember the death of our Lord at every meal in all that we eat. That's fine - nothing wrong with that! So long as we also keep the Lord's Supper as something set apart and different; so as long as when it comes time to eat that meal we don't treat as ordinary.

The Lord's Day wasn't my invention or the invention of anyone else. God gave it that name so that we would realize that this is the Christian Sabbath. Do worship Him and meet with other believers all week long - the more the better! But don't, then, because you are doing that treat the Lord's Day as common.

I don't know if you see this, but it seems to me that you are saying 'having a Sabbath doesn't make sense'. Perhaps I can never prove to you that it does, just as I can perhaps never prove to some that God's laws about sexuality make sense... and in that case we must humbly lay our own reasoning at His feet and submit to His word.

I would hope that the jews of old who were looking to the Messiah also had a willingness and joy on the Sabbath as David apparently did...

Brother, why does there have to be a difference? The only difference that I find is that in the New (when it comes to the moral law) is that the Spirit is outpoured in much (!) greater measure so that our willingness and want and ability to obey should be all the greater - but the NT hasn't changed any of the other commands so why should it change the 4th? And as I have tried to articulate in the previous posts the NT does not abrogate that command.

Thanks for mentioning those books. I haven't read Pink's letters so I'll have to sometime track that down. [ed. I do love M'Cheyne's Memoirs and rank it with Rutherford's lettes as one my favourite books after the Bible]

I appreciate you 'holding my feet to the fire'. Even if we come away from this [not seeing eye to eye] I do hope we can come away better understanding each other.

Your brother,

Edit: You added the following and I want to acknowledge it, ///(Edit)P.S. Just to reiterate that I am writing this with nothing but love, respect and grace toward you. I am not looking to score a win or convert you over to the non-sabbatarian side. Hatching these things out help enrich my own walk and give me a greater understanding of why I hold to the things that I do. And it helps me better understand the mature and intelligent opposition.///

I appreciate that and it is obvious in the tone of your posts. So, thank you. And rest assured I am not looking to score a win but I am most hopeful to convert you over to the sabbatarian side. :) But, whatever comes I believe this thread is an example of gracious dialogue across a divide and it has challenged me and as you put it I hope and pray it will prove an enrichment in my walk with Him who a friend recently described as the Best of Masters.

And brother, however you spend tomorrow I hope that like Rutherford you will be able to come away from the day testifying that you have been well-feasted with a Great King.

P
PaulWest

Thank you, for answering. I'm not going to make a big deal of this, as others I'm sure will read and form their own opinions as you have your own convictions. I will only ask you a few questions to see where we stand, legally.

I don't do house chores or yard chores. I do actively encourage others to tell their employer (assuming they are not doing a work of necessity) they cannot work and then accept the loss of job if it comes to that. I don't go to restaurants or stores or gas stations so that others may rest as well as me.

I have an immense problem with the "work of necessity" clause, for, to me, it implies expediency and has no scriptural basis - even in the OT. How can there be an exemption (based upon a worldy obligation) to Sabbatical law? Unless, of course, there is no law but only convictions. If these are your convictions, to not do yardwork, watch TV or do laundry one day a week as an act of faith on a day you have hallowed in your family as the Sabbath, this is one thing, and you are even to be commended! Sweeping them upon others with a broom of guilt if they differ in conviction, however, is another thing altogether (I'm not saying you do this, brother). A question: If I watch TV, do my laundry or go to a gas station (or do anything you do not do) on a Sunday, have I sinned? Have I displeased God?

I don't understand what it is about the physicals that has you troubled. The physical of the 7th commandment is that I must not take another woman (other than my wife) into my bed. Is that all that the command requires? Of course not - so it is with the Sabbath: there are physical and spiritual requirements.

The physical requirements are to not watch TV or do laundry on the Christian Sabbath? Are these God's requirements or men's convictions? If they are God's specific requirements under the New Covenant, I need a chapter and verse. In the New Testament idolatry is mentioned, blasphemy, honoring parents, murder, adultery, lying, covetousness - all these are dealt with. Instructions for Sabbath-keeping; i.e. the question of what is lawful or not, does not exist (it is not even alluded to). Unless we are to merely carry over the OT (updated for the 20th century) Sabbath ritual with less stringent intentions.

Brother, this is why I keep harping on the "physical": we are led by an invisible Holy Spirit to make spiritual sacrifices. In the OT everything was physical: physical goats, turtledoves, physical adultery, physcal murder, physical enemies like the Jebusites and Amalekites, physical washings, dietery restrictions, physical temples and stone tablets and mercy seats. Physical high priests. And, yes, a physical weekly sababath given to Moses. Abraham, the typology figurehead of New Covenant faith, had no commandment to keep a worklessly monastic "shall and shall" not Sabbath. In fact, if you want to really get techincal, no one prior to Moses (Jew or Gentile) kept the Covenental Sabbath (Deuteronomy 5:2-4).

it seems to me that you are saying 'having a Sabbath doesn't make sense'. Perhaps I can never prove to you that it does, just as I can perhaps never prove to some that God's laws about sexuality make sense... and in that case we must humbly lay our own reasoning at His feet and submit to His word.

Brother, the Sabbath rest makes perfect sense to me if it is incapsulated in the Person of Jesus Christ. He is my Sabbath; He alone. Doing yardwork or not doing yardwork doesn't change that or commend me to God any more or less. If it were only that easy! To make a sin out of turning on the TV on Sunday is Pharaseeism 101 (I'm not calling you a Pharisee, dear brother, please understand). Maybe I can't watch TV or wash my dirty clothes, but what about rubbing grain? Or peeling potatos? Can I light a fire in my stove to boil noodles? Where does it end? Who makes the rules? My denomination?

For some reason you keep bringing up sexual sin and linking it to external Sabbath obedience. I thought we addressed that a few times already.

The only difference that I find is that in the New (when it comes to the moral law) is that the Spirit is outpoured in much (!) greater measure so that our willingness and want and ability to obey should be all the greater - but the NT hasn't changed any of the other commands so why should it change the 4th?

It doesn't! I can tell you before God that Jesus Christ is my Sabbath and that this witness has been internalized by the Holy Spirit and (most importantly) corroborated by scripture. Through Him I am led to always have victory and joy, not just once a week. The Holy Spirit propels my obedience of the 4th Commandment with willingness and pleasure to the same degree as He empowers me to obey the other 9. There is absolutely no difference at all. I don't want to take a strange woman into bed; I cheerfully mortifiy lust through the Holy Spirit in Christ. I can do yardwork or laundy on Sunday if I need to; for I am cheerfully led by the Holy Spirit to rest in Christ and make spiritual sabbatical sacrifices all week long.

Sorry for the length! Does any of this make sense?

God bless you dear friend.


S
sermonindex

Brother, thanks for your response and don't apologize to me (of all people!) for the length.

I'll try to answer as I can and stand down (as Bearmaster puts it) until I have more time next week.

The work of necessity clause comes straight out of the gospels. Jesus rebuked the pharisees because they wouldn't help someone on the Sabbath. If a doctor cannot work in an ER because its the Sabbath people will die - Jesus was very clear that that is an abuse of the Sabbath. I'm guessing you misunderstood what I meant by work of necessity.

You said: ///A question: If I watch TV, do my laundry or go to a gas station (or do anything you do not do) on a Sunday, have I sinned? Have I displeased God?///

I would hesitate to say that you should not do anything I do not do. I was telling you what I do. But yes, watching football, doing laundry, going shopping IS sinful on the Lord's Day. When you or I or anyone else has done this we have sinned. I stand in a long tradition when I say this. It is no more and no less than what our brother Duncan Campbell said in his day, Leonard Ravenhill in his, Lloyd-Jones in his, Spurgeon in his, M'Cheyne in his, Whitefield and Wesley and Brainer and Edwards and so on...

The chapter and verse you are looking for is Isaiah 58.12-14. That passage which expands on Exodus 20 and Deut. 5 remains relevant in the NT unless you can point to a chapter and verse that repeals it. You have pointed to Colossians and Romans and I have explained those texts - Jesus actually spoke more about the Sabbath than any other command, but He never repealed it. Instead He called Himself the Lord of the Sabbath and then gave the name Lord's Day to Sunday... we also have his example in John 20 (notice the reference to the 8th day, something clearly foreshadowed in the OT) and the example of the apostles. Based on what I read here at SI the example of the apostles alone ought to be enough.

Paul, not everything in the Old was physical. Look at the Psalms... at David's heart! Look at the two great commandments in Deut. and Lev. respectively. Look at Abraham believing God's promise and being counted righteous by grace alone through faith alone. See Hebrews 11 for how those men were justified in the sight of God. In fact, the prophets had a big problem with physical, and they were calling people to be concerned with the matter of the heart - really no different in that sense than the New Covenant.

I would contend that before Moses even gave the law people were keeping the Sabbath. See Exodus 16. But notice also the reason given in Exodus 20 for keeping the Sabbath. God points the people back to what He did when He sanctified the day at the very beginning. I find it interesting that Cain was cursed for murdering his brother. There was no announcement about taking another person's life before then, but that moral law was understood. We find Abraham rebuked for lying when, again, there was no announcement about lying up until then, but - again - that moral law was understood.

Paul, let me ask you as question:

Is it pharisaism to make sin out of viewing a little bit of pornography? Of course not! We have to be consistent.

I wouldn't say it is sinful to turn on any TV on Sunday. It depends what is being watched. But I would absolutely say it IS sinful to turn on football on Sunday! Why? Because football is sinful? Of course not... but it is sinful on that day because God has commanded us to put pleasure and work aside on His day. If He has commanded it it is not pharisaism or legalism. Paul, if what I am saying is pharisaism 101 than our fathers in the faith never got past it. That would make Ravenhill a pharisee and Spurgeon a pharisee, and so on...

Take the first commandment. For absolutely everyone that command forbids bowing down to baal (an external act), for everyone that command forbids spending 10 hours a day watching television (an external act that reveals an idolatrous heart), but for some (!) that commmand would forbid watching any television because it is a problem.

On the Sabbath I choose not to watch television or movies, but someone else might choose to watch it so long as it is consistent with the principle of Sabbath keeping, which requires putting aside work and play so that we may worship God.

I keep bringing it back to adultery because you are struggling both with the idea of an external rule and with the difficulty of application. I don't believe it is necessarily easy to sort out what is permissable on Sunday, just as it is sometimes difficult to sort out what is allowed in relationship to the question of adultery and lust.

All the commandments have difficult areas of application but we don't throw up our hands in disgust and decide the command has to go. Instead we prayerfully and conscientiously seek to be obedient. And some things are forbidden for all like watching pornography and somethings are forbidden for some, like going to a mall or a beach. Some things are internal like lust and others are external like taking someone else into our bed. Sorry to go over that but I do think it is an important analogy. Isn't it true that you are having trouble with the externals of the Sabbath simply because you don't believe the Sabbath is still binding? - because you don't have trouble with externals in any of the other commandments! So long as obedience doesn't stop (!) at the externals.

You said, ///The Holy Spirit propels my obedience of the 4th Commandment with willingness and pleasure to the same degree as He empowers me to obey the other 9. There is absolutely no difference at all. I don't want to take a strange woman into bed; I cheerfully mortifiy lust through the Holy Spirit in Christ. I can do yardwork or laundy on Sunday if I need to; for I am cheerfully led by the Holy Spirit to rest in Christ and make spiritual sabbatical sacrifices all week long.///

What if you are wrong? I know people who are cheerfully led by the Holy Spirit - so they say! - to live a homosexual lifestyle, to leave a spouse, to turn on filth (and call it liberty!)... to the law and to the testimonies! He leads by His Word.

How is it that generations of godly men and women were led to put away recreation and work on Sunday and led to rebuke others for failing to put such things away and led to call it sin and you are not? Either they or you are wrong, and the only way to sort that out is not an inner sense but the Bible. I used to feel quite free to do as you have admitted doing on a Sunday - I was praying, seeking God and there wasn't the slightest twinge of guilt... Until I began to be confronted with the Word of God. It is amazing how our consciences are changed by God's Word.

Paul I am pleading with you for consistency. If someone told you the Spirit led them to leave their spouse (as Todd Bentley did) for someone else you would point them to the Word of God and insist that whatever led them was not the Spirit of God. And if someone told you that you are being legalistic for saying we should be scrupolous about honesty you would probably chuckle. The question is, what is God's will? If He has told us to put away work and recreation on this day how can it be legalistic to do so?

I am not discouraging you from worshiping all week long. Do as much as you can! But doing that should not take away from your obligations to the Sunday Sabbath.

"God hangs revival on the keeping of the sabbath. Read Isaiah 58." - Leonard Ravenhill

P
PaulWest

watching football, doing laundry, going shopping IS sinful on the Lord's Day. When you or I or anyone else has done this we have sinned.

Brother, this grieves me, for it is the trump that signals the end of the discussion.

I've read everything else you wrote in that post, and hope others do as well to evaluate our exchanges and decide for themselves. This is the beauty of a discussion forum when disagreements are presented maturely, intelligently. Thank you, again, for standing your ground with conviction and honesty. I think you are in serious error and do not have a correct understanding of the New Covenant, but you probably think the same of me! So we will just embrace each other as brothers and agree to disagree.

God's blessings to you, Stephen, and may He impart to us both a more perfect knowledge of His grace and love.

Paul

H
Heydave

Stephen, I have been carefully reading the discussion between you and Paul West with great interest. You both have made good and thought provoking points during this.

However I have to agree with brother Paul that your statement in your last post as follows really discloses a huge problem with your view.

watching football, doing laundry, going shopping IS sinful on the Lord's Day. When you or I or anyone else has done this we have sinned.

If, as previously said by brother Paul, these are your personal convictions that would be fine, but to make a list of things you would accuse others of sin goes way over the bounds of anyone's authority. Let's be clear here. We are not talking about 'sins' that are clearly declared so in scripture, but things that are normal acceptable activities (such as laundry, shopping, etc) that because they are done on a Sunday become in your view sinful.

I would presume that you have to do certain tasks on a Sunday. Maybe preparing and eating food; driving a car; getting children ready for church; etc, etc.
Some would say that driving a car on Sunday is OK and some say it is wrong. Can you prepare food, but just not cook it? What is acceptable preparation and what isn't? You see the problem of making lists! So what you need is a ruling from a pope like person to tell you what you can and can't do!
The Amish folk suffer from this problem of deciding what new technology is 'worldly and sinful' and change their minds frequently. This is because they are ruling beyond their authority.

Here is the scriptural teaching of this subject:

"Who 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."
"One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind."
Romans 14:4-5

We are NOT to judge another's (God's) servant.
Each one should be convinced (have his own conviction) of what is right for him in these things.

We need to understand that when Paul says 'each day alike' or 'one day above another' he means just that. He is writing to a church comprised of Jews and gentiles which is the background for the many things said in this epistle. So as such it would be obvious that there could be a difference between them of how they view the Sabbath.

So in summary, those who do not hold to keeping the Sabbath should not judge you who do and you in turn should not judge those who do not hold the conviction of Sabbath keeping.

May God bless you richly as you seek to honour Him with your life. God sees your heart and your desire to please Him and this is the most important thing. Who am I to tell you that you should not do what you do in these things?


M
MrBillPro

I think it's ok for each to have different convictions, but there is a very thin line between convictions and condemnation. Are we really convicted of watching football on Sunday? or is it possible Satan is helping us out, with a little condemnation? I truly believe that we all have different convictions, and they derive from places we are weak in, and that's ok. If it takes a personal conviction to move us away from a habit, and closer to the Lord, I see no problem with that. If we go around being convicted of others convictions, I personally think this can lead to a state of confusion, and who is the king of confusion? Not God, he is the King of Grace and Forgiveness, I still believe you can't out sin God's Grace.

S
sermonindex

Dear brother Paul, I am sorry that you feel that my calling something sin is the trump that signals the end of the discussion. Certainly, we can embrace each other as brothers and agree to disagree, but I believe it is an important part of our maturity to be able to hear people tell us we have sinned even if we don't agree.

From the beginning of this discussion I have been saying much like Leonard Ravenhill that until we repent of this sin and begin again to remember the (Christian) Sabbath we cannot hope for revival.

Here we are at an internet site dedicated to revival and inspired by a host of men who all said the same things I am saying (on the Sabbath)! This has never been a discussion about personal preferences and private convictions.

Our pluralistic world is fascinated with personal preferences and it loves to get behind private convictions. What makes us Christian is when we begin to speak about God's will as revealed in the Bible, and as soon as we say God's will we have also said by implication "sin."

Heydave said, ///If, as previously said by brother Paul, these are your personal convictions that would be fine, but to make a list of things you would accuse others of sin goes way over the bounds of anyone's authority. Let's be clear here. We are not talking about 'sins' that are clearly declared so in scripture, but things that are normal acceptable activities (such as laundry, shopping, etc) that because they are done on a Sunday become in your view sinful.///

There is a glaring inconsistency here that I find deeply troubling and it is an inconsistency that runs right through this thread. I am trying to make the case that the Sabbath command is still binding (much like those dear saints Brainerd, Whitefield, Wesley, M'Cheyne, Spurgeon, Lloyd-Jones, Duncan Campbell - of the revival hymn - and Ravenhill did in their time), but my friends here at SI keep coming back to the charge of legalism.

If God has commanded it isn't legalism! So, I would urge you to get back to our discussion about the command. The trump card isn't calling something sin, it is when we charge one another with legalism as soon as we begin use words like "ought" and "sin".

Legalism is when we treat the law as a means of salvation; and legalism also shows up when we stop at the externals... but, again, when we emphasize the heart that emphasis NEVER then gives us the excuse to ignore the externals if those externals are obligatory.

I'm not telling you Paul or Dave that you must do these things in order to be saved, nor am I saying that if you simply stop doing laundry and watching football that you will have fulfilled the requirements of the 4th commandment...

But brothers, are we at such a point in church history that even on a website dedicated to revival where we honour the memories of men who believed doing laundry and playing sports was sinful on the Lord's Day that we can't even entertain the conversation because we are convinced it is legalistic?

It is God who has given us a list of things we must not do and it is with his authority that pastors stand up and call it sin when we people do what he has forbidden. It is forbidden to lie, it is forbidden to steal, it is forbidden to murder, it is forbidden to commit fornication, it is forbidden to bow down to an idol, it is forbidden to blaspheme God. If you or I do any of these EXTERNAL things we have sinned. But of course you mustn't stop there because every command has at the back of it love for God and love for our neighbour (read over Dt. 30)...

Brothers, we have forgotten the very commandment God urged us to remember... and here is the inconsistency: we can all handle being told we "ought" to do this and "ought not" to do that and never once accept the charge of legalism, but someone (myself in this case) speaks about the obligations of the 4th commandment and we bring up the word legalism.

Paul and Dave, I know you don't mean it except in love and with the best of intentions, but what you are saying is just what practicing 'Christian' homosexuals are saying when we charge them with sin. And how do you answer? You try to point them to scripture and they keep coming back with the charge 'legalist' - so, what's your answer? "You may disagree with me on my interpretation of the Bible, but don't charge me with legalism for urging you to do what I believe the Bible commands you to do..."

If I were a prophet (which I am not) I would predict that in 100 years the same conversation will be had about the obligations of the 7th commandment, and someone like myself will raise the issue and it will be received as my comments have been received here: with graciousness, with patience, but with a sense of incredulity and the conclusion that this dear brother is a legalist.

I love you my dear brothers in the Lord, but I believe we fool ourselves talking about revival, holding conferences on revival and praying for revival when we are not willing to repent, and when we are so far from a healthy understanding of the law that we will call obedience legalism.

Paul, I will certainly respect your desire to back out of the conversation, but your reasons are reasons I deeply regret.

H
Heydave

Stephen,

One thing in your last post to Paul and myself that stands way out is your repeated claim that you have been called a 'legalist'. I cannot fathom why you would think such a thing, as nowhere do I see that I or Paul said such a thing! I must conclude that this word is on your conscience.
In fact I went out of my way to make it clear that I do not speak against you holding to the Sabbath in the way you believe.

Now to address some of your points....

Quote: "But brothers, are we at such a point in church history that even on a website dedicated to revival where we honour the memories of men who believed doing laundry and playing sports was sinful on the Lord's Day that we can't even entertain the conversation because we are convinced it is legalistic? "

You keep referencing various teachers. However I'm not convinced they laid out specific activities as sin. But even if they did, it is the bible that is our rule not any man's teaching. My reading of the bible and in particular the NT (which interprets the old for us) shows me differently to what you are saying.

Quote: "It is God who has given us a list of things we must not do and it is with his authority that pastors stand up and call it sin when we people do what he has forbidden. It is forbidden to lie, it is forbidden to steal, it is forbidden to murder, it is forbidden to commit fornication, it is forbidden to bow down to an idol, it is forbidden to blaspheme God. If you or I do any of these EXTERNAL things we have sinned. But of course you mustn't stop there because every command has at the back of it love for God and love for our neighbour (read over Dt. 30)... "

Here is the inconsistency as I see it. This list above is clearly defined in both testaments of the bible as sin (on any day of the week). It is a wrong comparison. What you are doing is taking activities that are NOT sin and calling them sin because they are performed on one particular day (the Sabbath). It is completely different and I can't understand why you can't see that. It comes down to your (or someone else's) definition of at what point something is breaking the Sabbath. Where in the bible does it mention watching a ball game? Nowhere! So you have determined that this fits some criteria that is forbidden. If for you it would be considered sinful, then it is, but maybe not for someone else. (BTW I don't watch sport on TV any day, so I'm not defending myself).
My point is this...Even if you believe the Sabbath is something we should keep, you still have no authority to make a list of do's and don't's that are not stated clearly as such. It's a bit like the modesty issue. The bible exhorts to dress modestly, but it does not list the exact type, length, color of such dress, but leaves it with individual to work that out themselves in their walk with the Lord.

I re-state what the bible says in Romans 14:5

"One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind."

M
MaryJane

HeyDave wrote:My point is this...Even if you believe the Sabbath is something we should keep, you still have no authority to make a list of do's and don't's that are not stated clearly as such. It's a bit like the modesty issue. The bible exhorts to dress modestly, but it does not list the exact type, length, color of such dress, but leaves it with individual to work that out themselves in their walk with the Lord.

I re-state what the bible says in Romans 14:5

"One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind."

____________________________

I appreciate you pointing this out.

God bless
mj

M
MrBillPro

HeyDave wrote, I re-state what the bible says in Romans 14:5 "One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind."

I appreciate you pointing this out also. Not being intensive to others convictions or beliefs, but I really do think sometimes we Christians make Christianity way to complicated. I just have a hard time believing God meant it to be this way, but maybe he did, guess I will know on judgement day. God is beyond our comprehension,Christ is our liaison, The Holy Spirit is God's translator.

S
sermonindex

Hi Dave,

If I have misunderstood you or Paul then I am be glad to be corrected. Please don't misunderstand me. Even if I have been called a 'legalist' I do not take offense [edit: it is very difficult to communicate online on a subject so contentious without coming across defensive or angry or short. If anything at any point has come across in such a way please let me know so that I may apologize. I do want the conversation to be gracious]. I think it is a mistake and a misunderstanding of the word, but I need to be able to hear such things from a brother even as I think others need to be able to hear the word 'sin'... but here are a couple quotes from Paul that suggest legalist (which is the word I used):

///To make a sin out of turning on the TV on Sunday is Pharaseeism 101". Paul, kindly said he was not accusing me of being a pharisee, but the implication of course is that if we call turning on the TV on Sunday we are towing the line of the pharisee... ie. legalism.///

In his last post Paul said that the conversation could no longer be entertained because I had used the word 'sin' in reference to activities like shopping and watching sports on Sundays, and then he conluded with these words (which were kind and gracious but also suggestive):

///God's blessings to you, Stephen, and may He impart to us both a more perfect knowledge of His grace and love.///

Again, if I have misunderstood you or Paul I am sorry and am happy to be corrected.

Dave you said, ///You keep referencing various teachers. However I'm not convinced they laid out specific activities as sin. But even if they did, it is the bible that is our rule not any man's teaching.///

They did lay out specific activities as sin including the very ones I listed - but you are quite right: The Bible is to be our only rule. But we must be sure that we mean it when we say Bible, because I think sometimes (in this dispensational age) what we really mean is New Testament. I do believe a Biblical case can be made for the perpetual obligation of the Sabbath, but in order for that case to be made and/or refuted we need to be able to have the discussion using words like 'sin'.

Dave, what the Sabbath does is it forbids activities that are ordinarily permitted. Would you agree that the Sabbath forbids ordinary work that can be done the other 6 days of the week? (See Exodus 20 and Dt. 5.)

I have previously pointed to a text that adresses things like watching sports (that text is Isaiah 58) and it is the same text Leonard Ravenhill highlighted to address this very activity of watching sports on the Lord's Day.

You and MrBrillPro and MaryJane have been highlighting a text: Romans 14.5... and I have in previous posts tried to explain as Lloyd-Jones and others did that that passage has no bearing on the Sabbath. Paul when he spoke about our freedom of conscience in that text was dealing with things indifferent. Things like food and drink. Things also like Christmas, Easter and other kinds of feast days. A commandment is not a thing indifferent.

So, before someone brings up Romans 14.5 and applyies it to this discussion we first need to establish that the Sabbath commandment has been abrogated somehow and this is precisely the discussion we have been having. For centuries our forefathers in the faith have said that Romans 14.5 and Colossians 2 have no bearing on the command itself because while the shadows of the OT have been put away the moral law has not.

I would be glad to explain Romans 14 and Colossians 2, but we need to be clear on our definitions of legalism.

Paul, I would understand if you had bowed out of this conversation for some other reason, but the reason you gave is one I cannot understand. [edit: I love you in the Lord, and will go on thanking God for the unity we do have in Him, but it would help me if you can explain why the things I said in that one post caused you to bow out of this discussion. Thanks brother]

I had said /// watching football, doing laundry, going shopping IS sinful on the Lord's Day. When you or I or anyone else has done this we have sinned.///

To which Paul replied, /// Brother, this grieves me, for it is the trump that signals the end of the discussion. ///

Brother, if I have misunderstood what you were saying help me to understand what you meant by this. In what way did what I say signal the end of the discussion? Was I wrong to read 'legalism' into the concern behind your post? Is it the word 'sin'?

M
MrBillPro

Stephen2....Hi Dave,You and MrBrillPro and MaryJane have been highlighting a text: Romans 14.5... and I have in previous posts tried to explain as Lloyd-Jones and others did that that passage has no bearing on the Sabbath.

Stephen after further study your right, I just took it at face value, thanks for pointing that out.
Mr. Bill

S
sermonindex

Thanks MrBrillPro

Here's something from Ravenhill.

///Don't you pray for a loved or someone else when you are fooling around on Sundays and won't keep the sabbath. Some of you go to movies on Sunday night.

You, keep the sabbath day holy. Some of you who used to come here a lot said: "I don't think I need to keep the Sabbath Days. It's Old Testament." Your neighbor thinks they don't have to keep the other Ten Commandments like "Thou shalt not commit adultery". You break one commandment. He breaks the other. If you break one, you are guilty of all.

God hangs revival on the keeping of the sabbath. Read Isaiah 58.

"Take your foot from my sabbath". That's when FOOTBALL is you see.

"Take your foot from doing your pleasure on my holy day"./// - Leonard Ravenhill

William Symington (19th century) wrote, "The conscience has no inherent absolute rights; all the liberty it possesses is conferred upon it by God; and it is utterly absurd to suppose that any man possesses from God a right to blaspheme his name, to worship an idol, or to profane his sacred day. As well might a man claim a right to murder, to commit adultery, or to steal, if only his conscience might permit or prompt him to perpetrate such atrocities."

H
Heydave

Stephen,
I could take more time than I have to go over and over this with you, but we basically disagree with each other and no amount of posting is going to change your or my mind. I am happy for you to keep a Sabbath day as you do. You however are not content for others to see it differently. You think you are right and you use every argument there is to establish your position, whether that be the law, various teachers or tradition.

You said ///Paul when he spoke about our freedom of conscience in that text was dealing with things indifferent. Things like food and drink. Things also like Christmas, Easter and other kinds of feast days. A commandment is not a thing indifferent.///

There is nothing in the text of Romans 14 for you to say Paul was talking about feast days such as Christmas or Easter and not the Sabbath. Yes he was talking about food and drink, but he also introduced the observing of the day. Christmas and Easter were not introduced into the church for many years after this letter to the Romans and Paul would not be condoning these Roman pagan festivals as OK. You cannot dismiss this passage so easily as not applying to the Sabbath, even if MLJ said so. I personally do think it applies, as I said before it is in context to who the letter was written to (a Jewish and Gentile Church).

You said ///Dave, what the Sabbath does is it forbids activities that are ordinarily permitted. Would you agree that the Sabbath forbids ordinary work that can be done the other 6 days of the week? (See Exodus 20 and Dt. 5.)///

You made reference to the Sabbath pre-dating the law of Moses and I think that there is some evidence that this may be the case, as Jesus referred to the Sabbath as being ‘made’ for man. I would take this to mean that God ‘made’ the Sabbath when he ceased from His creation work after six days. God did not need the rest (think about it), but made it for us so we could rest. There is no reference before the law of Moses of precise regulations of what could and could not be done, we can only take it that it was designed to give us one day in seven to rest from working. I think this is still God’s design for all mankind. Then came the law of Moses where even in the 10 commandments recorded in Exodus and Deuteronomy it only says to cease from work and does not say anything more of the detail you have ‘flagged up’ as sin. You have to go to the detail of the Mosaic law and other OT passages for that and even then interpret them to fit current lifestyles.

If you want to live by the strict Mosaic law of the Sabbath then I take it you do not kindle a fire on the Sabbath (exodus 35:3), which I would interpret in today’s culture as lighting up any form of heating. I guess it’s pretty cold in Canada in winter! Do you use electricity on the Sabbath? If so people have to work at the power station to provide that for you. I’m not being funny, but you have to be consistent. You see the law of Moses added restrictions to the basic principle of the Sabbath rest and we are not under the law of Moses. We are in Christ who is Lord of the Sabbath.

Just a point on necessary work as this came up previously. I find it interesting that Jesus healed folk on the Sabbath. Was this really a necessity? These folk had been sick many years and waiting one more day to heal them would not have been an issue, but Jesus seemed to make a point of healing them on the Sabbath. I wonder why? Was it because he wanted to draw out the hypocrisy of the Pharisees?

So in summary I believe God gave us the Sabbath as a day of rest from our normal working week. Whether that be the Saturday, Sunday or another day because of work schedules it is a God given ordinance that we should break from our work. I do not believe we are obligated to the law of Moses in this. If we are, then according to that law it must be Saturday and all the other restrictions apply.

S
sermonindex

I hear you Dave! We could go on and on over the same territory at the cost of a whole lot of time... We both think ourselves right on this and perhaps neither of us will change - though I am certainly willingly to entertain the conversation so long as there is even a glimmer of hope!

Brother, on this you are absolutely right: I am NOT content for others to see this differently just as I am not content for others to see any of the other commandments differently. You could, for example, argue liberty of conscience and right of private judgment and New Covenant grace until you were blue in the face, and I would still insist that you should not practice homosexuality because that is a practice prohibited by God as a moral law that will never change. The Sabbath is no different. It is a command, it is a part of God's moral law and it will never change - and I believe one of the primary reasons our nations are in spiritual captivity is because of our disobedience on this command.

See how often the prophets cited this sin as the reason for Israel's captivity and even the length of their captivity.

I am glad you agree with me that God didn't need a rest when He rested, which (along with other evidence) is why I believe the Sabbath is not a day for inactivity but a day for worship. His rest was a rest of delight as ours is meant to be.

I would be happy to work out the problems of application but first we have to establish the command. Same goes for the day whether Saturday or Sunday. We are often tempted to look at consequences and lose sight of duty. Perhaps application is difficult, perhaps you would conclude a fire should not be lit if you believed that the Sabbath is still binding, but that (the difficulty of it!) is no reason to decide the command is no longer binding. Jesus said we are to count the cost - which doesn't mean deciding which commands are likeable, simple and/or geared to our lifestyle. Rather we begin by figuring out what God wants then we do it and only afterward worry about consequences. Consequences simply should not figure into the thing.

Those who have held to the Sabbath in the past - which, again, is most Protestants since the reformation up until the 20th century - have argued that along with works of necessity Jesus taught us that acts of mercy are also permitted on the Lord's Day, which I think resolves your question of Jesus healing people.

Dave, I would be happy to try to explain these things, but let's agree that we shouldn't start with the difficulties and allow those difficulties to decide what God wants us to do. First, we want to look at the command and then work out the application.

Feel free to bow out of the conversation at any point. I don't mean to badger you even if I do hope to see you change your mind. Dave I used to think like you and my views would have been expressed just as they are expressed in that guideline book that Greg posted - but when I began being confronted with the weight of the testimony of church history I decided to research and pray. I am so glad I did and I would commend that to you and to others. Take a few months or a year (as I did) and read nothing else but your Bible and books on the Sabbath question and only then make your decision, but don't simply dismiss the things being said here.

I think if you realized you were the only Christian in the Christian church to believe a particular thing you would stop long and hard and pray and study before proceeding to stand like Luther did. You are not alone on the Sabbath in this godless generation, but if you were to travel back in time to any period (any revival) since the reformation and up until this last century you would be virtually alone. So do please think on it.

A
a-servant

Quote: "William Symington (19th century) wrote, "The conscience has no inherent absolute rights; all the liberty it possesses is conferred upon it by God; and it is utterly absurd to suppose that any man possesses from God a right to blaspheme his name, to worship an idol, or to profane his sacred day. As well might a man claim a right to murder, to commit adultery, or to steal, if only his conscience might permit or prompt him to perpetrate such atrocities."

Interesting take, however not applicable in current day America, because it assumes a people that want a God over them they are accountable to.

Instead we have teachers, dogmas and a right to believe what is right in our own eyes. You also have to note that there is no law, neither in the church nor in the world. Good example to show that is the comparison of Egypt lawyers to US lawyers in regard to crimes against humanity:

http://blogs.cbn.com/ibrahim/archive/2013/11/07/obama-accused-of-crimes-against-humanity.aspx

In Egypt (!) - think about that, yes Egypt, truth still is a factor within the law, in the US: not at all, already sold to the highest bidder. Yes the church should have higher values, but in reality the "no one above us, or above self" theme is the exact same as in the world. Everyone has an opinion, and these are basically all human ideas, non of it relates to what God said (and meant). Some of that can be corrected by investigation of facts, for example the question "is the Lord's day really Sunday" - or is it actually Saturday, because the Lord was raised before Sunday, that would be easy to resolve after reading early Jewish history instead of the later Catholic one. And early church disputes that are recorded as well.

Quote: "The Sabbath is no different. It is a command, it is a part of God's moral law and it will never change - and I believe one of the primary reasons our nations are in spiritual captivity is because of our disobedience on this command."

Well said, mature understanding. I have a short-form expression for that: "The Sabbath will exist in 100 and 1000 years from now - America will not"

H
Heydave

Brother Stephen,
I am going to bow out and therefore leave you in your discontent. The reason being that I see no further profit for each of us to continue and I am commanded to avoid disputes about the law. This has now reached the point where both of us have expressed our position and do not agree. Further discussion will just lead to disputing and contention.

For my part I wish you well in your choice of keeping Sunday as a Sabbath day as you do and would not want to dissuade or malign you in any way, even though I see it differently to you. My disagreement with you is not your 'keeping' of it, but your insistence of judging every one who does not observe in the way you say.

See you in another topic :)

S
sermonindex

Thank you Dave for your post, and I will, of course, respect your wish.

One point of clarification on what you said in your post: ///My disagreement with you is not your 'keeping' of it, but your insistence of judging every one who does not observe in the way you say.///

I remain convinced that written communication is the most easily misunderstood and misinterpreted. It easy to read tone where no tone was meant and to press into the hidden things that only God can see. I don't know what you mean by judging but I do want to clarify what I have meant...

You don't mind my keeping the Sabbath because to you it is a matter of indifference, and so you are actually being quite consistent. I, on the other hand, believe with Leonard Ravenhill that Sabbath-keeping (on Sundays!) has nowhwere been abrogated so I, too, am being consistent when I call it sin when others break it.

I am not, however, suggesting that because I keep the Sabbath (in the way that I do) that I am more godly than brothers in the faith who do not because there is a whole lot more to godliness than the 4th commandment. So in that sense, if I have seemed to judge you (as being somehow less godly than I) or if I have seemed condescending I want to apologize.

But I do want you to see, even if you and Paul and others continue to disagree with me, that I am being consistent too. We must call sin what it is. There may be things about my life that in time I will realize are sinful and I will have to repent when I make those discoveries - perhaps there are things that you would point out if you knew me better and I might not want to hear it but that doesn't mean you shouldn't say it simply because I don't agree. There are serious consequences to disobedience, especially when an entire commandment is set aside as abrogated... imagine the church simply dropped the 7th commandment! Believing what I believe about the 4th commandment you would think a great deal less of me if I didn't have the courage to call it sin.

Here is a free e-book for download by Matthew Henry worth considering,

http://www.lulu.com/shop/matthew-henry/the-sabbath-a-serious-address-to-those-that-profane-the-lords-day/ebook/product-21297154.html

S
sermonindex

Here is a short but very powerful you tube clip worth checking out:

http://youtu.be/cYBV5Y0rrBs

Reposting:

I remain convinced that written communication is the most easily misunderstood and misinterpreted. It easy to read tone where no tone was meant and to press into the hidden things that only God can see. I don't know what you mean by judging but I do want to clarify what I have meant...

You don't mind my keeping the Sabbath because to you it is a matter of indifference, and so you are actually being quite consistent. I, on the other hand, believe with Leonard Ravenhill that Sabbath-keeping (on Sundays!) has nowhwere been abrogated so I, too, am being consistent when I call it sin when others break it.

I am not, however, suggesting that because I keep the Sabbath (in the way that I do) that I am more godly than brothers in the faith who do not because there is a whole lot more to godliness than the 4th commandment. So in that sense, if I have seemed to judge you (as being somehow less godly than I) or if I have seemed condescending I want to apologize.


But I do want you to see, even if you and Paul and others continue to disagree with me, that I am being consistent too. We must call sin what it is. There may be things about my life that in time I will realize are sinful and I will have to repent when I make those discoveries - perhaps there are things that you would point out if you knew me better and I might not want to hear it but that doesn't mean you shouldn't say it simply because I don't agree. There are serious consequences to disobedience, especially when an entire commandment is set aside as abrogated... imagine the church simply dropped the 7th commandment! Believing what I believe about the 4th commandment you would think a great deal less of me if I didn't have the courage to call it sin.

M
MaryJane

Stephen2 wrote:But I do want you to see, even if you and Paul and others continue to disagree with me, that I am being consistent too. We must call sin what it is. There may be things about my life that in time I will realize are sinful and I will have to repent when I make those discoveries - perhaps there are things that you would point out if you knew me better and I might not want to hear it but that doesn't mean you shouldn't say it simply because I don't agree. There are serious consequences to disobedience, especially when an entire commandment is set aside as abrogated... imagine the church simply dropped the 7th commandment! Believing what I believe about the 4th commandment you would think a great deal less of me if I didn't have the courage to call it sin.
________________________

Stephen2

I have been following along with the thread even though I had bowed out of the conversation a while back I felt led to come back and share this with you. I think the thing that I have noticed is in your writing you come across as saying that "if I or others do not keep the sabbath as you do we are in sin." It almost seems as if you do not accept that other keep the sabbath as GOD gives them leading and understanding to do so. JESUS didn't abolish the keeping of the sabbath, HE made it bigger because now in HIM we are told GOD wants our whole heart every moment of every day not just one day out of the week.HE wants every day, in fact HE wants every moment of every day. When I go about my day, JESUS is there with me, we are never parted. I have fellowship with HIM(HE is a person) daily and we walk, talk, and I grow in HIM knowing HIM better because HE is everything to me. HE is my rest, strength, life, I don't have to get caught up in setting aside a special day because every day with HIM is meaning full, every moment with HIM is a chance and opportunity to listen, learn, and grow in HIM. To me this is what is truly meant that if I am in HIM daily I will find rest in all that I do because HE is my rest and that is keeping the sabbath.

As for sin, I have no fear of others who walk with CHRIST sharing with me when I am in sin. If you knew me and we walked together daily then I would expect nothing less from you but as you said this is a forum where each of us can woefully misunderstand one another so that kind of fellowship can be very difficult and probably not really achievable.

I appreciate the things you shared and your heart in sharing them. I have had many topics like this come up in my time here on SI and I always seek to know HIS heart on each matter.There have been times when GOD has opened my eyes and I see things differently and there have been times such as this when HE confirms to me what HE has shown me. May JESUS be lifted up and glorified in all that we do.

God bless
mj

S
sermonindex

Thanks MaryJane, there is a whole lot of misunderstanding which is certainly inevitable.

You said, ///It almost seems as if you do not accept that other keep the sabbath as GOD gives them leading and understanding to do so.///

I can certainly clarify. I do NOT (I do want to be clear)accept that others keep the sabbath as God gives them leading and understanding to do so IF what they say God gives them and leads them to do is contrary to the Bible. You are entering this discussion already with the assumption that it is up to us to observe the Sabbath as we feel led which is not (!) an assumption you bring to any of the other commandments.

Now there is certainly grey area to the application of all them. As I think through the first commandment I'm going to maybe choose to have no TV while someone else might choose to watch less TV. But this is why I said the following...

///I would hesitate to say that you should not do anything I do not do. I was telling you what I do. But yes, watching football, doing laundry, going shopping IS sinful on the Lord's Day. When you or I or anyone else has done this we have sinned. I stand in a long tradition when I say this. It is no more and no less than what our brother Duncan Campbell said in his day, Leonard Ravenhill in his, Lloyd-Jones in his, Spurgeon in his, M'Cheyne in his, Whitefield and Wesley and Brainer and Edwards and so on...///

So there are things I don't do as a matter of personal conscience that others do who also hold to the perpetual obligation of the Sabbath. But there are some things that are not a matter of personal conscience IF the commandment is still binding in the New Testament... and those things include the examples I gave above which anyone who holds to the Sabbath would agree to.

///JESUS didn't abolish the keeping of the sabbath, HE made it bigger because now in HIM we are told GOD wants our whole heart every moment of every day not just one day out of the week.HE wants every day, in fact HE wants every moment of every day.///

MaryJane that just brings us back to the discussion of whether or not the Sabbath has been abrogated. Do you seriously believe that in the Old Testament God didn't (!) want their whole heart every moment of every day and not just one day out of the week?! He said as much. He said in the OT He wanted every day and every moment of the day. The New Testament is on that score not even slightly different. The standard remains unchanged. Jesus when He gave the two great commandments (to love God and love our neighbour) quoted directly out of the OT.

I rejoice with you in your testimony of God's grace in your life and the joy you have abiding in Him. I will pray even as I finish this post that the Lord will continue to bless you in that way - but I will also pray that you would discover that God offers something even more when He gives us the Sabbath day for worship.

http://youtu.be/cYBV5Y0rrBs

M
MaryJane

Stephen2 wrote:I rejoice with you in your testimony of God's grace in your life and the joy you have abiding in Him.
___________________

Thank you for your polite discussion, as in all things I pray HE be lifted up and glorified.

God bless you Stephen

maryjane

S
sermonindex

REST OF THE SAINTS.

TEXT.---For we which have believed do enter into rest.---Heb. iv. 3.

The following is the course of thought to which I wish to direct your attention this evening:

I. I shall endeavor to show what is not the rest here spoken of.

II. Show what it is.

III. Show when we are to enter into this rest.

IV. Show how to come into possession of this rest.

V. Show that all sin consists in or is caused by unbelief.

I. I will endeavor to show what is not the rest spoken of in the text.

1. It is evidently not a state of inactivity in religion, that is spoken of in the text under the name of rest.

The apostle who wrote this was very far from being himself inactive in religion, or from encouraging it in others. Those of whom he spoke, including himself, where he says, "WE who haved believed, do enter into rest," would know at once that it was not true, that they had entered into the rest of supineness.

2. Neither are we to understand that the perfect rest of heaven, is the rest here spoken of.

He speaks of it as a present state, "we DO enter," which was not consistent with the idea that heaven is the rest here spoken of. The perfect rest of heaven includes an absolute freedom form all pains, trials, sufferings and temptations of this life.---The rest of the believer here, may be of the same nature, substantially, with the rest in heaven. It is that rest begun on earth. But it is not made perfect. It differs in some respects, because it does not imply a deliverance from all trials, pains, sickness, and death. The apostles and primitive Christians had not escaped these trials, but still suffered their full share of them.

II. I will show what we are to understand by the rest here spoken of.

1. It is rest from controversy with God.

In this sense of cessation from controversy, the word rest, is often used in the Bible. In the context, it is said the children of Israel rested, when they were freed from their enemies. It is cessation from strife or war. Those who enter into this rest cease from their warfare with God, from their struggle against the truth, their war with their own conscience. The reproaches of conscience, that kept them in agitation, the slavish fears of the wrath of God under which men exert themselves as slaves in building up their own works, all are done away. They rest.

2. It implies cessation from our own works.

(1.) Cessation from works performed for ourselves.

Much of the apparent religion there is in the world is made up of works done by people which are their own, in this sense. They are working for their own lives---that is, they have this end in view, and are working for themselves, as absolutely as the man who is laboring for his bread. If the object of what you do in religion be, that you may be saved, it matters not whether it is from temporal or eternal ruin, it is for yourself, and you have not ceased from you own works, but are still multiplying works of your own. Now, the rest spoken of in the text, is entire cessation from all this kind of works.---The apostle, in verse 10th, affirms this: "He that is entered into his rest, hath ceased from his own works." And in the text, he says, "We that believe do enter," or have entered, "into rest." It is plain that this rest is ceasing from our own works. Not ceasing from all kinds of works, for that is true neither of the saints on earth nor of saints in heaven. We have no reason to believe that any saint or angel, or that God Himself, or any holy being is ever inactive. But we cease to perform works with any such design as merely to save our own souls. It is ceasing to work for ourselves, that we may work for God. We are performing our own works, just as long as the supreme object of our works is to be saved. But if the question of our own salvation is thrown entirely on Jesus Christ, and our works are performed out of love to God, they are not our own works.

(2.) In entering into this rest, we cease from all works performed from ourselves, as well as works performed for ourselves.

Works are from ourselves, when they result from the simple, natural principles of human nature, such as conscience, hope, fear, &c., without the influences of the Holy Ghost. Such works are universally and wholly sinful. They are the efforts of selfishness, under the direction of mere natural principles.---His conscience convicts him, hope and fear come in aid, and under this influence, the carnal, selfish mind acts. Such acts cannot but be wholly sinful. It is nothing but selfishness.---Multiply the forms of selfishness by selfishness forever, and it will never come to love. Where there is nothing but natural conscience pointing out the guilt and danger, and the constitutional susceptibilities of hope and fear leading to do something, it comes to nothing but the natural workings of an unsanctified mind. Such works are always the works of the flesh, and not the works of the Spirit. To enter into rest is to cease from all these, and no more to perform works from ourselves than for ourselves. Who does not know what a painful time those have, who set about religion from themselves; painfully grinding out about so much religion a month, constrained by hope and fear, and lashed up to the work by conscience, but without the least impulse from that divine principle of the love of God shed abroad in the heart by the Holy Ghost? All such works are just as much from themselves, as any work of any devil is. No matter what kind of works are performed, if the love of God is not the mainspring and life and heart of them, they are our own works, and there is no such thing as rest in them. We must cease from them, because they set aside the gospel. The individual, who is actuated by these principles, sets aside the gospel, in whole or in part. If he is actuated only by these considerations, he sets aside the gospel entirely. And just so far as he is influenced by them, he refuses to receive Christ as his Savior in that relation. Christ is offered as a complete Savior, as our Wisdom, Righteousness, Sanctification, and Redemption. And just so far as anyone is making efforts to dispense with a Savior in any of these particulars, he is setting aside the gospel for so much.

(3.) To enter into rest implies that we cease from doing anything for ourselves.

We are not so much as to eat or drink for ourselves; "Whether, therefore, ye eat or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God." The man who has entered into this rest, has ceased from doing it. God requires it, and he that has entered into rest has ceased to have any interest of his own. He has wholly merged his own interest in that of Christ. He has given himself so perfectly to Christ, that he has no work of his own to do. There is no reason why he should go about any work of his own. He knows he might as well sit still till he is in hell, as attempt anything of his own, as to any possibility of saving himself by any exertions of his own. When a man fully understands this, he ceases from making any efforts in this way. See the convicted sinner, how he will strain himself, and put forth all his efforts to help himself, until he learns that he is nothing; and then he ceases from all this, and throws himself helpless and lost, into the hands of Christ. Until he feels that he is in himself without strength, or help, or hope, for salvation or anything that tends to it, he will never think of the simplicity of the gospel. No man applies to Christ for righteousness and strength, until he has used up his own, and feels that he is helpless and undone. Then he can understand the simplicity of the gospel plan, which consists in RECEIVING salvation, by faith, as a free gift. When he has done all that he could, in his own way, and finds that he has grown no better, that he is no nearer salvation, but rather grown worse, that sin is multiplied upon sin, and darkness heaped upon darkness, until he is crushed down with utter helplessness, then he ceases, and gives all up into the hand of Christ. See that sinner, trying to get into a agony of conviction, or trying to understand religion, and finding all dark as Egypt, and cannot see what it is that he must do. O, says he, what must I do? I am willing to do anything. I can't tell why I don't submit, I know not how to do anything more; what am I to do, or how shall I find out what is the difficulty? When he is fully convinced, then he turns his eyes to the Savior, and there he finds all he needs, Wisdom, Righteousness, Sanctification, and Redemption. Christ the Life of the world, the Light of the World, the Bread of Life, and he needs nothing of all these but what is in Christ, that all he wants, and all he can ask, is in Christ, and to be received by faith; then he ceases from his own works, and throws himself at once and entirely upon Christ for salvation.

(4.) To cease from our own works is to cease attempting to do anything in our own strength.

Everyone who has entered into rest knows, that whatever he does in his own strength, will be an abomination to God. Unless Christ lives in him, unless God worketh in him, to will and to do, of His good pleasure, nothing is ever done acceptably to God. To set himself to do anything in his own strength, independent of the Spirit of God, is forever an utter abomination to God. He who has not learned this, has not ceased from his own works, and has not accepted the Savior. The apostle says we are not able of ourselves to think anything, as of ourselves. The depth of degradation to which sin has reduced us, is not understood until this is known and felt.

3. To enter into rest also includes the idea of throwing our burdens upon the Lord Jesus Christ.

He invites us to throw all our burdens and cares on Him. "Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest." "Casting all your cares upon him, for he careth for you." These words mean just as they say. Whether your burden is temporal or spiritual, whether your care is for the soul or body, throw it all upon the Lord. See that little child, going along with his father; the father is carrying something that is heavy, and the child takes hold with its little hand to help, but what can he do towards carrying such a load? Many Christians make themselves a great deal of trouble, by trying to help the Lord Jesus Christ in His work. They weary and worry themselves with one thing and another, as if everything hung on their shoulders. Now, the Lord Jesus Christ is as much pledged to the believer for ALL that concerns him, as He is for his justification; and just as absolutely bound for his temporal as for his eternal interests. There is nothing that concerns the Christian, which he is not to cast on the Lord Jesus Christ. I do not mean to be understood, that the Christian has no agency in the matter. Here is a man who has cast his family upon Jesus Christ; but he has not done it in any such manner, that he is not to do anything for his family. But he has so cast himself upon God, for direction, for light, for strength, for success, that he has yielded himself up absolutely to God, to guide and to sustain him; and Christ is pledged to see to it, that everything is done right.

4. To enter into rest is to make the Lord Jesus Christ our Wisdom, our Righteousness, our Sanctification, and our Redemption; and to receive Him in all His offices, as a full and perfect substitute for all our own deficiencies.

We lack all these things, absolutely, and are to receive Him as a full and perfect substitute, to fill the vacancy, and supply all our needs. It is to cease expecting or hoping or attempting anything of ourselves, to fill the vacancy; and receiving Christ as all.

5. Entering into this rest implies the yielding up of our powers so perfectly to His control, that henceforth all our works shall be His works.

I hope you will not understand anything from this language, more mystical than the Bible. It is a maxim of the Common Law, that what a man does by another, he does by himself. Suppose I hire a man to commit murder; the deed is as absolutely my own as if I had done it with my own hand. The crime is not in the hand which struck the blow, any more than it is in the sword, that stabs the victim. The crime is in my mind. If I use another's hand, if my mind, as the moving cause, influenced him, it is my act still. Suppose that I had taken his hand by force, and used it to shoot my neighbor, would not that be my act? Certainly, but it was in my mind, and it is just as much my act, if I influenced his mind to do it. Now apply this principle to the doctrine, that the individual who has entered into rest has so yielded himself up to Christ's control, that all his works are the works of Jesus Christ. The apostle Paul says, "I labored more abundantly than they all; yet not I, but the grace of God in me." And he frequently insists upon it, that it was not himself that did the works, but Christ in him. Do not misunderstand it now. It is not said, and is not to be so understood, that the believer acts upon compulsion, or that Christ acts in him without his own will, but that Christ by His spirit dwelling in him, influences and leads his mind that he acts voluntarily in such a way as to please God. When one ceases from his own works, he so perfectly gives up his own interest and his own will, and places himself so perfectly under the dominion and guidance of the Holy Spirit, that whatever he does is done by the impulse of the Spirit of Christ. The Apostle describes it exactly, when he says, "Work out your own salvation, with fear and trembling, for it is God that worketh in you, to will and to do of his good pleasure." God influences the will, not by force but by love, to do just what will please Him. If it was done by force, we should be no longer free agents. But it is love that so sweetly influences the will, and brings it entirely under the control of the Lord Jesus Christ.

It is not that our agency is suspended, but is employed by the Lord Jesus Christ. Our hands, our feet, our powers of body and mind, are all employed to work for Him. He does not suspend the laws of our constitution, but so directs our agency, that the love of Christ so constrains us, that we will and do of His good pleasure.

Thus you see, that all works that are really good in man, are, in an important sense, Christ's works. This is affirmed in the Bible, over and over again, that our good works are not from ourselves, nor in any way by our own agency without God, but God directs our agency, and influences our wills, to do His will, and we do it. They are in one sense our works, because we do them by our voluntary agency. Yet, in another sense they are His works, because He is the moving cause of all.

6. Entering into this rest implies, that insomuch as we yield our agency to Christ, insomuch we cease from sin.

If we are directed by the Lord Jesus Christ, He will not direct us to sin. Just as far as we give ourselves up to God we cease from sin. If we are controlled by Him so that He works in us, it is to will and to do of His good pleasure. And just so far as we do this, so far we cease from sin. I need not spend time to prove this.

III. I am to inquire when they that believe do enter into rest.

It is in this life.

I. This appears from the text and context. The apostle in connection with the text, was reasoning with the Jews. He warns them to beware, lest they fail of entering into the true rest, which was typified by their fathers' entering into the land of Canaan. The Jews supposed that was the true rest. But the apostle argues with them, to show that there was a higher rest, of which the rest of temporal Canaan was only a type, and into which the Jews might have entered but for their unbelief. If Joshua had given them the real rest, he would not have spoken of another day. Yet another day is spoken of. Even so late as David's day, it is spoken of in the Psalms as yet to come: "To-day, after so long a time; as it is said, Today if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts. For if Jesus (that is Joshua) had given them rest, then would he not afterwards have spoken of another day. There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God." He therefore argues, that the rest in Canaan was not the real rest which was promised, but was typical of the true rest. What then was the true rest? It was the rest of repose of faith in Christ or the gospel state, a cessation from our own works. And believers enter into that state by faith.

I know it is generally supposed that the rest here spoken of is the heavenly rest, beyond this life. But it is manifestly a rest that commences here. "We which believe DO enter into rest." It begins here, but extends into eternity. It is the same in kind, but made there more perfect in degree, embracing freedom from the sorrows and trials to which all believers are subject in this life. But it is the same in kind, the rest of faith, the Sabbath-keeping of the soul when it ceases from its own works, and casts itself wholly upon the Savior.

2. It is manifest that this rest must commence in this world, if faith puts us in possession of it. This is the very point that the apostle was arguing, that faith is essential to taking possession of it. They "could not enter in because of unbelief." "Beware, lest ye fail of entering in after the same example of unbelief." He warns them not to indulge in unbelief, because by faith they may take immediate possession of the rest. If this rest by faith ever commences at all, it must be in this world.

3. The nature of the case proves this. Nothing short of this taking possession of rest is fully embracing Jesus Christ. It is a spiritual rest from the conflict with God, from the stings of conscience, and from efforts to help ourselves by any workings of our own mind. Nothing short of this is getting clear away from the law, or entering fully into the gospel.

IV. I am to show how we are to enter into this rest.

From what has already been said, you will understand that we take possession of it by faith.

The text, with the context, shows this. You will recollect also what the Lord Jesus Christ says, Matthew xi. 28, 29---"Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart; and ye shall find rest unto your souls." Here this same rest is spoken of, and we are told that if we will only come to Christ, we may find it. If we will take His easy yoke, which is love, and trust Him to bear all our burdens, we shall find rest. The Psalmist speaks of the same rest---"Return unto thy rest, O my soul." What Christian does not know what it is to have the soul rest in Christ, to hang upon His arm, and find rest from all the cares and perplexities and sorrows of life?

Again---It is evident that faith in Christ, from its own nature, brings the soul into the very state of rest which I have described. How instantly faith breaks up slavish fear, and brings the soul into the liberty of the gospel! How it sets us free from selfishness, and all those influences we formerly acted under! By faith we confide all to Christ, to lead us, and sanctify us, and justify us. And we may be just as certain to be led and to be sanctified, as we are to be justified, if we only exercise faith and leave ourselves in the hands of Christ for all. As a simple matter of fact, such faith brings the soul into a state of rest. The soul sees that there is not need of its own selfish efforts, and no hope from them if they were needed. In itself, it is so far gone in sin that it is as hopeless as if it had been in hell a thousand years. Take the best Christian on earth, and let the Lord Jesus Christ leave his soul, and where is he? Will he pray, or do anything good, or acceptable to God, without Christ? Never. The greatest saint on earth will go right off into sin in a moment, if abandoned by Jesus Christ. But faith throws all upon Christ, and that is rest.

Again: Faith makes us cease from all works for ourselves. By faith we see, that we have no more need of doing works for ourselves, than the child needs to work for his daily bread, whose father is worth millions. He may work, from love to his father, or from love to the employment, but not from any necessity to labor for his daily bread. The soul that truly understands the gospel, sees perfectly well that there is no need of mingling his own righteousness with the righteousness of Christ, or his own wisdom with the wisdom of Christ, or his own sufferings with the sufferings of Christ. If there was any need of this, there would be just so much temptation to selfishness, and to working from legal motives. But there is none.

Again: By faith the soul ceases from all works performed from itself. Faith brings a new principle into action, entirely above all considerations addressed to the natural principles, of hope and fear and conscience. Faith brings the mind under the influence of love. It takes the soul out from the influences of conscience, lashing it up to duty, and brings it under the influence of the same holy, heavenly principles, that influenced Christ himself.

Again: Faith brings the mind into rest, inasmuch as it brings it to cease from all efforts merely for its own salvation, and puts the whole being in to the hands of Christ.

Faith is confidence. It is yielding up all our powers and interests to Christ, in confidence, to be led, and sanctified, and saved by Him.

It annihilates selfishness, and thus leaves no motives for our own works.

In short: Faith is an absolute resting of the soul in Christ, for all that it needs, or can need. It is trusting Him for everything. For instance---Here is a little child, wholly dependent on its father. Now, if the little child did not trust its father, it must be constantly miserable. It is absolutely dependent on its father, for house and home, food and raiment, and everything under the sun. Yet that little child feels no uneasiness, because it confides in its father. It rests in him, and gives itself no uneasiness, but that he will provide all that it needs. It is just as cheerful and happy, all the day long, as if it had all things in itself, because it has such confidence. Now the soul of the believer rests in Christ, just as the infant does on the arms of its mother. The penitent sinner, like a condemned wretch, hangs all on Christ, without the least help or hope, only as they come from Christ alone, and as Christ does all that is needed.

If faith does consist in thus trusting absolutely in Christ, then it is manifest, that this rest is taken possession of, when we believe; and that it must be in this life, if faith is to be exercised in this life.

V. I am to show that unbelief is the cause of all the sin there is the world.

I do not mean to imply, by this, that unbelief is not itself a sin; but to say, that it is the fountain, out of which flows all other sin. Unbelief is distrust of God, or want of confidence. It is manifest that it was this want of confidence which constituted Adam's real crime. It was not the mere eating of the fruit, but the distrust which led to the outward act, that constituted the real crime, for which he was cast out of Paradise. That unbelief is the cause of all sin, is manifest from the following considerations:

The moment an individual wants faith, and is left to the simple influence of natural principles and appetites, he is left just like a beast, and the things that address his mind through the senses, alone influence him. The motives that influence the mind when it acts right, are discerned by faith. Where there is no faith, there are no motives before the mind, but such as are confined to this world. The soul is then left to its mere constitutional propensities, and gives itself up to the minding of the flesh. This is the natural and inevitable result of unbelief. The eye is shut to eternal things, and there is nothing before the mind, calculated to beget any other action but that which is selfish. It is therefore left to grovel in the dust, and can never rise above its own interest and appetites. It is a natural impossibility that the effect should not be so; for how can the mind act without motives? But the motives of eternity are seen only by faith. The mere mental and bodily appetites that terminate on this world, can never raise the mind above the things of this world, and the result is only sin, sin, sin, the minding of the flesh forever. The very moment Adam distrusted God, he was given up to follow his appetites. And it is so with all other minds.

Suppose a child loses all confidence in his father. He can henceforth render no hearty obedience. It is a natural impossibility. If he pretends to obey, it is only from selfishness, and not from the heart; for the mainspring and essence of all real hearty obedience is gone. It would be so in heaven, it is so in hell. Without faith it is impossible to please God. It is a natural impossibility to obey God in such a manner as to be accepted of Him, without faith. Thus unbelief is shown to be the fountain of all the sin in earth and hell, and the soul that is destitute of faith, is just left to work out its own damnation.

REMARKS.

I. The rest which those who believe do enter into here on earth, is of the same nature with the heavenly rest.

The heavenly rest will be more complete; for it will be a rest from all the sorrows and trials to which even a perfect human soul is liable here. Even Christ Himself experienced these trials and sorrows and temptations. But the soul that believes, rests as absolutely in Him here, as in heaven.

II. We see why faith is said to be the substance of things hoped for.

Faith is the very thing that makes heaven; and therefore it is the substance of heaven, and will be to all eternity.

III. We see what it is to be led by the Spirit of God.

It is to yield up all our powers and faculties to His control, so as to be influenced by the Spirit in all that we do.

IV. We see that perfect faith would produce perfect love, or perfect sanctification.

A perfect yielding up of ourselves, and continuing to trust all that we have and are to Christ, would make us perfectly holy.

V. We see that just as far as any individual is not sanctified, it is because his faith is weak.

When the Lord Jesus Christ was on earth, if His disciples fell into sin, He always reproached them with a want of faith: "O ye of little faith." A man that believes in Christ has no more right to expect to sin, than he has a right to expect to be damned. You may startle at this, but it is true.

You are to receive Christ as your sanctification, just as absolutely as for your justification. Now you are bound to expect to be damned, unless you receive Christ as your justification. But if you receive Him as such, you have then no reason and no right to expect to be damned. Now, He is just as absolutely your sanctification, as your justification. If you depend upon Him for sanctification, He will no more let you sin, than He will let you go to hell. And it is as unreasonable, and unscriptural and wicked, to expect one as the other. And nothing but unbelief, in any instance, is the cause of your sin. Some of you have read the life of Mrs. Hester Ann Rogers, and recollect how habitual it was with her, when any temptation assailed her, instantly to throw herself upon Christ. And she testifies, that in every instance He sustained her.

Take the case of Peter. When the disciples saw Christ walking upon the water, after their affright was over, Peter requested to be permitted to come to Him on the water, and Christ told him to come; which was a promise on the part of Christ, that if he attempted it, he should be sustained. But for this promise, his attempt would have been tempting God. But with this promise, he had no reason and no right to doubt. He made the attempt, and while he believed, the energy of Christ bore him up, as if he had been walking upon the ground. But as soon as he began to doubt, he began to sink. Just so it is with the soul; as soon as it begins to doubt the willingness and the power of Christ to sustain it in a state of perfect love, it begins to sink. Take Christ at His word, make Him responsible, and rely on Him, and heaven and earth will sooner fail then He will allow such a soul to fall into sin. Say, with Mrs. Rogers, when Satan comes with a temptation, "Lord Jesus, here is a temptation to sin, see thou to that."

VI. You see why the self-denying labors of saints are consistent with being in a state of rest.

These self-denying labors are all constrained by love, and have nothing in them that is compulsory or hard. Inward love draws them to duty. So far is it from being true, that the self-denying labors of Christians are hard work, that it would be vastly more painful to them not to do it. Their love for souls is such, that if they were forbidden to do anything for them, they would be in agony. In fact, a state of inaction would be inconsistent with this rest. How could it be rest, for one whose heart was burning and bursting with love to God and to souls, to sit still and do nothing for them. But it is perfect rest for the soul to go out in prayer and effort for their salvation. Such a soul cannot rest, while God is dishonored and souls destroyed, and nothing done for their rescue. But when all his powers are used for the Lord Jesus Christ, this is true rest. Such is the rest enjoyed by angels, who cease not day nor night, and who are all ministering spirits, to minister to the heirs of salvation.

The apostle says, "Take heed, therefore, lest a promise being left of entering into rest, any of you should come short of it." And "Let us labor therefore, to enter into rest. Do any of you know what it is to come to Christ, and rest in Him? Have you found rest, from all your own efforts to save yourselves, from the thunders of Sinai, and the stings of conscience? Can you rest sweetly in Jesus, and find in Him everything essential to sanctification and eternal salvation? Have you found actual salvation in Him? If you have, then you have entered into rest. If you haven't found this, it is because you are still laboring to perform your own works.

from http://www.stopsinning.net/obedience_r.htm

S
sermonindex


We locked the other thread started that featured speaking on the sabbath and gave an explanation why. We see it ok to see this thread continue for another short while as long as the conversations remain godly and civll but as stated in the past thread we do not want the sabbath topic to be continue to be discussed for this will be in volition of the guiding principles community rules.

The other thread in question was:
https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=50804&forum=45

S
sermonindex

My dear brother, I will repost what I have posted elsewhere because I think it applicable. I have no wish to carry on the debate.

///I wonder, though, how they would fare in in our forum. Would we chase them off for not promoting the peace, for raising thorny issues, for rebuking us for sins that are particular to our age and generation?

...Dear brothers and sisters, you love these men but do you love what they preached? You love their fearless confrontation of sin but will you hear someone confront yours?///

Yours in the Lord,

E
elected

Keeping of the first day of the week as sabbath day is a matter of conscience. It was emperor Costantine who in the 4th cent made Sunday the day of rest by law. There is no evidence from early church or NT that sunday was to be the sabbath day for christians, actually is very probable that the jewish christians in Jerusalem and the apostles there kept the jewish sabbath because the church was still in transition. In the early church there were many christian slaves who had to work first day of week, because the first day of the week it was not a day of rest in roman empire during the 1st, 2nd and 3rd centuries. Paul became all things to all men, that he by all means might save some and that means that he kept the jewish sabbath when he lived among the Jews to win them to Christ and among the Gentiles he became like one outside the law (but he kept the law of Chist) for gosples sake that they might share with him in its blessings.


There is no new commandment by God or Christ in the New Testament that commands christians to observe first day of the week as sabbath. Nowhere in the NT apostles taught that either. So far as I know there is no evidence from early church that sunday became the sabbath day. The logical question to be asked is: By whose authority are we to observe sabbath on the first day of the week? Constantine , puritans, christian tradition? If observance of jewish sabbath is abolished by Christ because we are not under law but under grace, what makes us believe that we should reinstitute sabbath on sunday? Who gives us the right to call sin what by definition of the word of God and the Gosple in the Bible is not sin?


According to NT princinple there are matters of conscience, for example where eating meat offered to idols is sin for some christians and for others who say grace and sanctify the meat by the word and eat it for the glory of God is not sin. The same biblical principle I believe applies to the first day of the week, some christians would observe it as a day of rest in good faith for the glory of God, and other chritians would consider everyday by faith the same for the glory of God. We know that the early christians gathered together first day of the week to worship the Lord, it was the day that the Lord rose from the dead, and it became for christians a special day where they would share the Lords supper, hear the Word, praise God and fellowship together, it was love for God and each other that brought them together on that special day.

- edited

R
RogerB

Those who love the way their religion operates will do it their way. Others who love theirs will do it that way.It takes the Holy Spirit to unlock the areas of stubbornness in our minds. I once was a Sabbath Keeper. I tended to make the scriptures support me as does everyone else.

The Jews with the Law had a wall they couldn't see. Look at me, I'm better than you, I, keep the 10 commands. The promises are only for me! Jesus tore down the wall so no one could boast. Boast all you want about your religion.

Religion doesn't save. The tree that most churches still operate under is the tree of knowledge. Because we know this and that, we are the true church and those over there,well,
they're not. They're going to hell.

It's time churches sought Jesus and begin to eat from the tree of life. Jesus said he came to lay an ax to the tree. I see the command to love your neighbor the absolute hardest command in the Bible. It covers a large expanse including people in other lands. One must ask himself, am I supporting those who kill others? Do I vote to support the system that kills at will? Do you worship the Beast? USA USA? Oh yes.

True Israel went into captivity in Babylon for breaking the Sabbath, but they broke everything else. When they came back from there they were full of Babylon just like today. Had a hard time getting anyone to come back. They all loved Babylon, married their women. To them, life was good in Babylon

The church today is just like they were, fight against each other, and it's no problem to slander your brother in another church. Like "good ole Baptist" etc.

Yahushua talked to me the other night and told me we were at the end. Will a new set of leaders in office turn things around? No. 2008 was the year we reached 400 years in the land. Seems like God has removed his favor. He says Repent.
That's our weapon. It will save us all, not the Sabbath

R
RogerB

Forever is actually two words. It usually means for a period of time.

As to the Law, you can read in Romans 3:19-31 That by the deeds of the law will no flesh be justified. It causes boasting.
In vs 31 we see That the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed.

We must go back in time when Moses asked the Lord, More or less he said "who are you" in Exodus 34:5-7. God requires Justice for our sins. Justice is the same word in Hebrew as Righteousness.

Justice is going to be required of us unless someone steps up to the plate and dies as us. That was done by Jesus. he was our propitiation. Once we are baptized and the Holy spirit comes into our lives we are not operating under the law but grace, not license to sin. As we allow the spirit to work we move from image to image. We mature.

Jesus tells us the kingdom is within us and we should see ourselves as the household of God. We begin to understand the rules of the kingdom. The law itself doesn't have the promise of the kingdom. It's earthly.

But I won't to move higher, so I abandon the ways of the world and move forward. I'm like Adam was when he was in the garden. Now I can talk with my Father. He will lead me where I need to go. If I slip up, I'm not going to be struck dead like Uzza. That's the law and the penalty. I'm being salvaged. A repair / rebuild process is taking place. I don't have to keep the Sabbath to enter the Kingdom, I'm already there.

S
sermonindex

///Religion doesn't save. The tree that most churches still operate under is the tree of knowledge. Because we know this and that, we are the true church and those over there,well, they're not. They're going to hell.///

Roger, I have said I won't discuss the Sabbath anymore, but I did want clear up what looks like a misunderstanding. I also regret when others act as if theirs is the only true church and that others are going to go to hell. I believe there are very many very godly 'non-Sabbatarians'. The truth is that we are saved by grace not by our works. But I do still believe that it is sin to do work or recreation on the Sabbath, I do believe (as Ravenhill put it!) that it hinders our prayers and brings spiritual consequences on the Church. But it doesn't disqualify people from the kingdom.

S
sermonindex

"But yes, watching football, doing laundry, going shopping IS sinful on the Lord's Day. When you or I or anyone else has done this we have sinned."

Would you pull your son or a work animal out of a well on the Sabbath??? Seriously moderators...why is this thread still going? Why is a real life pharisee allowed to spout this kind of stuff and confuse and potentially bring young christians into bondage who might stumble into these forums?

P
PaulWest

Would you pull your son or a work animal out of a well on the Sabbath??? Seriously moderators...why is this thread still going? Why is a real life pharisee allowed to spout this kind of stuff and confuse and potentially bring young christians into bondage who might stumble into these forums?

I was hoping it would just go away. There is enough truth in this thread to counter the error, but I agree with you that intervention is necessary. So I am terminating this thread, with the request that any new sabbatarian discussions not be started.

For it is both unwise and unprofitable to wrangle over these legal issues. Paul dealt with it in his day, and warned Titus and Timothy for good reason.

This discussion is archived and closed to new replies. Start a new discussion to carry the subject on.
Archived
1 of 92 posts

Everything we make is available for free because of a generous community of supporters.

Donate