Romans 14:4-6
The Passing of the Sabbath
Pastor Martin expounds Romans 14:4-6, Galatians 4:8-11, and Colossians 2:16-17, addressing common misinterpretations of these passages regarding the Sabbath. He argues that while the Old Covenant seventh-day Jewish Sabbath has passed away, the moral principle of the Fourth Commandment and the observance of a Christian Sabbath (the Lord's Day) remain. Martin emphasizes the historical context of the early church's transition from Old to New Covenant practices and calls for charity and patience towards non-Sabbatarian brethren, even while standing firm in the conviction of the Lord's Day as the Christian Sabbath.
Primary Texts
Topics
Outline 12 sections · 46 min
- Introduction and Prayer 0:00
- Recap of Previous Arguments and Introduction to the Passing of the Old Sabbath 2:07
- Three Key Passages on the Passing of the Sabbath 4:13
- Wrong Interpretations of the Passages 6:38
- Refuting the 'Sabbath Fulfilled in Christ' Argument 10:00
- Refuting 'Indifference of Days' and 'Abolition of Fourth Commandment' Arguments 14:35
- Keys to Proper Interpretation: Historical Context 17:28
- Keys to Proper Interpretation: Paul's Focus on the Old Order 23:15
- Interpreting Romans 14:1-6 24:13
- Interpreting Galatians 4:8-11 28:01
- Interpreting Colossians 2:16-17 32:29
- Conclusion and Call for Charity 41:20
Key Quotes
“Well, what I want us to see is that these three passages do not teach that the fourth commandment no longer applies to us, but they do teach that the Jewish seventh day Sabbath no longer applies to us.”
“The infallible rule. Of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself. And therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture, which is not metaphor, but one, it must be searched by other places that speak more clearly to that subject.”
“The seventh day Jewish Sabbath is one thing. The first day Christian Sabbath or Lord's day is another thing to abolish the necessity of keeping the old code. Sabbath doesn't mean that there's no such thing as a new covenant Sabbath or that the fourth commandment no longer applies today.”
“The second thing that we need to keep in mind is that Paul's focus in those passages is upon this problem of the old order. He's not discussing the new order in those passages.”
“We work from the day of rest, the first day of the week, not toward the day of rest, the last day of the week, as the Jews did.”
“The one was a shadow or a mystery pointing forward to Christ. The other is not. The other is the body. It's not a shadow, but a testimony to the fulfillment that has been brought in by Christ.”
“I did want to say, to be fair, that these difficult passages regarding the Sabbath should cause us to be patient and charitable, I believe, toward non-Sabbatarian brethren who disagree with us.”
Applications
All listeners
- Desire to know God's scriptures not for accomplishment, but to be changed and shaped in thinking, feeling, and living.
- Come to God with the disposition of a servant ready to hearken to whatever God will say.
- The New Testament church is not to observe the seventh day as the Christian Sabbath.
- Observe the Fourth Commandment, but not on the seventh day, the Jewish Sabbath.
- Be patient and charitable toward non-Sabbatarian brethren who disagree about the Fourth Commandment's continuance.
- Be careful about our attitude toward others, how we judge others, and be patient in our dealings, seeking to lead them to the truth about the Sabbath.
- Stand firm in our conviction and practice of the Lord's Day as the Christian Sabbath.
A full transcript is available on the tab. 137 paragraphs, roughly 46 minutes.
Introduction and Prayer
All right, let's get started this morning, welcome you to another Lord's Day here at Emmanuel Baptist Church, and we are thankful to God for His goodness to us this week in preserving us and keeping us and bringing us back together, and we want to extend a welcome to you, especially if you're a guest with us today. Let's begin the day with prayer.
Our Father, we bow in your presence at the beginning of this Lord's Day, and we do want to thank you for your kindness and your mercy and your preserving grace in our lives throughout the week. We thank you for how you've provided for us. You've given to us our daily bread. We thank you that you have caused us to, by your spirit and your grace, to continue believing, to continue repenting, to continue to have the desire to follow and obey you and to worship you.
And we want to thank you that we have a place like this that we can go. To every Lord's Day, gather with your people and encourage one another in our faith and also learn from your holy word. And that is our desire this morning, that we would know your scriptures. And we want to know, Lord, not so we can just have a sense of accomplishment because of what we know, but in order that we might be changed by what we know and shaped in our thinking about you and in our feeling about you and also in the way that we live our lives.
We would come to you with the spirit of little Samuel when he said, not just speak, Lord, for your student here's, but speak, Lord, for your servant here's. Grant that we might have the disposition today of those who gathered in the home of Cornelius. So we saw Sunday evening that we are all gathered here in God's presence. To hearken to what ever God will say to us.
And it is in Christ's name we pray. Amen.
Recap of Previous Arguments and Introduction to the Passing of the Old Sabbath
Right.
Well, we pick up today where we left off. We're still here. We've probably taken about four times more time on this one than we did the individual ones before. But that's because it just as we as it developed, thought it was necessary to do that in our day.
And some of the questions have been raised. And so we're on the subject of the church's ethics. This is what we considered for several weeks regarding the abiding authority of the Ten Commandments.
We developed each of these arguments in some detail over several weeks. And then we're looking at the fourth commandment as the one that's probably the most controversial. We've been spending time on it. We looked at the biblical basis for the continuance of the Sabbath.
Those are the basic arguments. The change of the Sabbath. I'm not going to read over all of this. Most of you have been here.
You can just look at it or refresh your memory. And the coming of the new Sabbath, which was our focus last week. These were the basic arguments that were opened up and developed to change of the day, the first day of the week.
And I just remembered that someone wanted me to send them an email with those quotes from the early church fathers. They asked me last week and I forgot to do it.
You were supposed to send me an email to remind me. And you forgot to do that. Or I'll just put it this way. I'll just put it this way.
I'll just put it this way. I'll just put it this way. I'll just put it this way. I'll just put it this way.
I'll just put it this way. I'll just put it this way. Or we'll try again this week. Maybe we'll get it.
Okay. Now today we move to this subject, the passing of the Sabbath, the passing of the old Sabbath. We've looked at the possibility of a new Sabbath, the coming of the new Sabbath, and now the passing of the old Sabbath. Okay?
Three Key Passages on the Passing of the Sabbath
What I want us to see today is that the apostles and the apostolic churches not only observed the first day of the week, the Lord's Day, as the Christians did. They also taught that the old Jewish Sabbath day had passed away. And here I want to draw your attention to three passages in Paul's epistles that often trouble people, sometimes confuse people when it comes to the whole question of the Sabbath. In fact, these are the three main passages that are used by those who take the position that the fourth commandment of the Ten Commandments no longer applies to Christians.
In fact, if it were not for these three passages, I doubt if the non-sabbatarian position, would be held by any serious Christian, or at least it wouldn't have much credibility. Well, what I want us to see is that these three passages do not teach that the fourth commandment no longer applies to us, but they do teach that the Jewish seventh day Sabbath no longer applies to us. So if you have your Bibles, you can turn to these passages if you would like. I've put them up here.
The first passage is from Romans chapter 14, and I'm just going to read these sections right now. We'll be coming back and looking at it. I'm going to read each of these passages more carefully, but Romans 14, four to six. 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. He who observes the day, observes it to the Lord and he who does not observe the day to the Lord, he does not observe it. He who eats, eats to the Lord. For he gives God.
Thanks and he who does not eat to the Lord, he does not eat and gives God. Thanks. The second passage is the Galatians four, eight to eleven. But then, indeed, when you did know when you did not did not know God, you serve those which by nature are not gods.
But now, after you have known God or rather are known by God, how is it should be that you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements to which you desire? Again, to be in bondage, you observe days and months and seasons and years. I'm afraid for you, lest I have labored for you in vain. And in the third passage, the Colossians to 16, 17.
Wrong Interpretations of the Passages
So let no one judge you in food or drink or regarding a festival or a new moon or Sabbath, which are a shadow of things to come. But the substance is of Christ. Now, what I want to do first is to set forth some of the simplistic. And what?
I would argue wrong interpretations that are often given to these passages, or in other words, what these passages do not mean. And then I want to set forth what I believe to be the proper interpretation of these passages in light of all that we've seen over these weeks in our study of the subject of the Ten Commandments and of the Fourth Commandment in particular. So we begin first with some wrong interpretations.
First of all, some have argued that on the basis of these passages, that to keep the fourth commandment for us as Christians simply means. To rest by faith in the salvation that Christ has provided for us. They would try to draw support for that from the Colossians text, which says, so let no one judge you in food or in drink or regarding a festival or a new moon or Sabbath, which are a shadow of things to come. But the substance is of Christ and the Sabbath, they say, was but a shadow of the rest that we now have in Christ.
And since Christ has come and believers are resting in him, there is no place for a continued observance of the. Fourth Commandment will come back to that text. But let me just give some immediate replies to that. My first reply is that such an understanding violates an important principle of biblical interpretation.
And that simple principle is that any obscure text in Scripture has to be interpreted in a manner that's consistent with the teaching of the Bible as a whole on the subject in question. Now, our confession states this important principle in this way. The infallible rule. Of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself.
And therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture, which is not metaphor, but one, it must be searched by other places that speak more clearly to that subject. Now, with that in mind, it's simplistic, I think, to come to Colossians two and to either of the other two passages. And then on the basis of those texts alone, throw out everything that we've considered and all that we've considered in our study regarding the continued validity of the Bible. And then on the basis of those texts alone, throw out everything that we've considered and all that we've considered in our study regarding the continued validity of the Bible.
And then on the basis of those texts alone, throw out everything that we've considered and all that we've considered in our study regarding the continued validity of the Bible. Because that that would just fly in the face of all the massive weight of evidence that we've seen over these weeks in the Bible as a whole for the abiding authority of the Fourth Commandment. And I'm not going to go back over all of that. If you haven't been here, I just would ask you to go over it.
We've spent weeks on the whole subject as to whether the Ten Commandments have authority for the Christian and the New Covenant. Then we've seen that the Sabbath is a creation ordinance, that it's included in the Ten Commandments, that the continuance of a Sabbath day under the new covenant was predicted by the prophets, that the observance of the fourth commandment was upheld and confirmed, and what it means to observe that commandment was clarified by Christ during his earthly ministry to his disciples and to his church, that the apostles in the early church observed a Christian Sabbath, the Lord's Day. So we can't then read these passages in a way that just ignores all of that, all of that other teaching.
Refuting the 'Sabbath Fulfilled in Christ' Argument
A second immediate reply is that nowhere does the New Testament teach that the rest of the Sabbath is fulfilled when we rest in Christ by faith and are saved. It's common to hear people say that, but you just don't see that in the Bible anywhere. Now, it's true that we do enjoy a spiritual rest when we come to Christ and are for salvation. Come unto me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest, Jesus said.
And it's true that the Colossians text. It speaks of what Paul describes as food, drink, festivals, a new moon and Sabbath as shadows of things to come. But the substance is of Christ. But that's not the same thing as saying that the whole purpose of the fourth commandment is fulfilled when we rest in Christ by faith.
And there are several considerations that should make that clear.
First of all, people in the Old Testament were also saved by resting in Christ by faith, but they were still required to observe Sabbath. They rested. They rested. They rested.
They rested in the Christ to come. We rest in the Christ who has come.
Second, remember that one of the things the sequence of six days work and one day of rest does is it points back to God's work of creation.
Well, the Sabbath did that for the Israelites as well. It pointed back to God's resting from his work of creation. But the fact that creation had already occurred didn't mean that the Sabbath was not to be observed by the Israelites. The same is true for us.
Third, you remember that the Sabbath also pointed the Israelite back to redemption, their redemption from Egyptian bondage. Now, did the fact that that redemption had already been accomplished, did that mean then that they didn't have to observe the Sabbath? Of course not. And again, the same is true of the Christian.
The fact that Christ has redeemed us from sin, of which the redemption from Egypt was but a shadow, doesn't mean that the Christian, therefore, is no longer to observe the fourth commandment. Jesus rested from his redemptive work, his new creation work on the first day when he rose from the dead. But that doesn't mean that Christians are not to observe the day. No, you see, one purpose of the Sabbath is to serve as a commemoration of our redemption, just as it served for the Israelites as a commemoration of their redemption from Egypt.
Therefore, the fact that Christ has redeemed us doesn't somehow mean that a day of commemorating that fact has no place for us. It doesn't. It doesn't mean that any more than the fact that God redeemed Israel from Egypt meant that they were not to observe a day of commemorating that fact. That would be like saying, that argument is like saying this.
It's like saying that the Lord's Supper points us to the death of Christ by which he has saved us from our sins. But since that death has already occurred and our sins have been put away, we shouldn't observe the Lord's Supper. But there's something else very important that shows the error of this line of reasoning. The scripture also teaches that the Sabbath has a future reference.
It points to something that has not occurred. It points forward to something that hasn't happened yet. The Sabbath not only points us to creation and redemption, it also points forward. We saw this in one of our studies.
It points forward to consummation, to the eternal rest that will be ours in the heavens, new heavens and the new earth. And that hasn't happened yet. That's the teaching of Hebrews four. The writer there is exhorting Jewish Christians not to cast.
What their faith is exhorting them to persevere because there's a rest that still awaits the believer in Christ, the eternal rest. He says there remains, therefore, a rest, literally sabbatism, a Sabbath rest. There remains, therefore, a Sabbath rest for the people of God, a rest, he tells us, of which the land of Canaan, into which Joshua brought Israel, was but a picture and a type. And this Sabbath rest is future.
Christians have not entered it yet. So the point. It is that it's wrong to say that all that the Sabbath points to has already been fulfilled in Christ and that, therefore, there's no place any longer for a weekly observance of the Fourth Commandment. The Lord's Day commemorates what Christ has done for us, just as the Jewish Sabbath commemorated the Exodus and also the Christian Sabbath has a future reference that has not been fulfilled yet.
Refuting 'Indifference of Days' and 'Abolition of Fourth Commandment' Arguments
All right. A second interpretation sometimes given to these passages is that they teach that all observance. Of days in the New Covenant is a matter of indifference.
We're going to see real clearly later that that's not what they're teaching, but I'm just giving sort of quick responses right now. This is this is one of the arguments that it doesn't matter if you make a distinction between days or if you don't. If you don't, don't judge those who do. If you do, don't judge those who don't.
Making a distinction between days is now a matter of indifference. And those who argue that point to Paul's statement in Romans 14, five. One person esteems one day above another. Another esteems every day alike.
Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. Or they may point to the Galatians passage, which says, you observe days and months and seasons and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have labored for you in vain. Well, my immediate reply to that is much the same as the other.
It ignores the rest of what Scripture teaches about the Fourth Commandment. And then I would also add that it contradicts the apostles themselves and the practice of the apostolic churches.
If Paul is meaning to say that there's. Absolutely no place for making any distinction between days under the New Covenant. What about the emphasis given to the first day of the week in the Gospels? And what about the apostolic churches gathering to worship on the first day of the week, as we saw last week and calling that day not any other day, but that day, the Lord's day?
Obviously, there's a distinction being made between that day and every other day, both in practice and in the name given to it. Third interpretation.
And I think. His overly simplistic and wrong is that some argue that Paul specifically abolishes the necessity of keeping the seventh day Jewish Sabbath in these passages. And what do I say to that? Well, that's true.
But then they try to argue that in doing this, this means we're not to observe the Lord's day as the Christian Sabbath either. Well, I hope the fallacy of that argument is obvious if Paul indeed includes the seventh day Jewish Sabbath in these. His passages, which I think he does. And if he is telling us that the necessity of keeping the seventh day Jewish Sabbath is passed away, which I think he is, that doesn't equal the same thing as denying the abiding authority of the Fourth Commandment or the observance of the Lord's day.
The one doesn't somehow equal the other. The seventh day Jewish Sabbath is one thing. The first day Christian Sabbath or Lord's day is another thing to abolish the necessity of keeping the old code. Sabbath doesn't mean that there's no such thing as a new covenant Sabbath or that the fourth commandment no longer applies today.
Keys to Proper Interpretation: Historical Context
Well, having considered just a quick response to some of the very, I think, wrong and simple, simplistic interpretations given to these passages, let's consider now, secondly, what I believe to be the proper interpretation or what they do mean. Now, before we actually look at each passage briefly, there's two keys to properly understanding them, OK? You can't just pull them out and quote them out of context and that settles the issue. You've got to understand the context of what Paul was talking about in these passages.
First, we need to be reminded of the historical context in which Paul was writing. There are a few simple, undisputed historical and biblical facts that will help us. In the early days. In the infant days of the church, there was a transition that was taking place.
And we were in the midst of considering that transition even now in our study of the book of Acts. There was a transition from the old covenant order to the new covenant order. And that transition was not always smooth or immediate. It's not like just, you know, Christ rose from the dead and the spirit came and all of a sudden they completely understood everything about this transition and everything that was of the old order was immediately put away and everything is of the new order.
No, there was a period of transition that occurred in the church. A simple illustration of this, for example, is what we've been considering in the book of Acts, the inclusion of the Gentiles. You remember, we've been seeing that it took a while for that before what was at that time a Jewish church in Jerusalem came to really understand and to come to grips with the fact that Gentiles were included in the blessings of the gospel and that believing Gentiles were to be given full rights. And so, we've been seeing that.
We've been seeing that there were some privileges in the church without becoming Jews first. You remember Peter's reluctance to go to the house of Cornelius. This was some seven years, by the way, after the day of Pentecost at this event. And God had to give him a vision and so on to convince him.
And then later, Peter had to go back to Jerusalem and give testimony to the church. Well, some of the people there were upset over the fact that he had gone into the home of a Gentile and had eaten with them. So, there was a time of transition as the church was coming to a clear understanding of these things. And these things were being worked out.
The old order had passed away. The new order was coming in. And this transition was happening in many areas and other areas as well. For example, some Christians who were converted Jews continue to observe some of the worship practices of Judaism.
There are indications, in fact, that for a time, some of them combined worship practices of Judaism with those of Christianity.
Observing the Lord's Day, baptism in the Lord's Supper, but also continuing to observe the Seventh Day, Sabbath, circumcision, and the Passover. Paul himself did this kind of thing sometimes in order to not be an unnecessary stumbling block to the Jews. Don't we find that often, what's the first thing he usually does when he goes into a city? Where's the first place he goes?
The synagogue. What day was that, do you think, when the synagogue gathered?
Right. The Sabbath. The Jewish Sabbath.
Paul sometimes did this kind of thing in order not to be an unnecessary stumbling block to the Jews as long as the situation was such that doing so would not amount to a compromise of the gospel. We see an example of this in Acts 21. When Paul went to Jerusalem, we find Paul having his head shaved and engaging in purification rites in the temple.
Why was he doing that? Well, he wanted to demonstrate to the Jews. That were touchy about the fact that he had been preaching the gospel of the Gentiles and he hadn't completely cast off his his historical connection to to Judaism. And he was doing this in order not to be an unnecessary stumbling block to the Jews.
And you may remember that he also had Timothy circumcised. Timothy's father was a Greek. His mother was a Jew. When Paul began to take Timothy around with him to preach in the different churches in order that the door wouldn't immediately be closed.
To Timothy, when Paul Paul's first connecting point in preaching the gospel in these cities normally was with Jews. He had Timothy circumcised.
However, there were other Jewish Christians who went further and they sought to enforce the practices of the old order on Gentile Christians as something permanent and binding. We read about this. We will in Acts chapter 15, where this problem was addressed by the Jerusalem Council. Some of these Jews actually proved to be heretics.
They began to. Make trouble in some of the churches Paul had planted by insisting that justification was not by faith alone in Christ alone, but by faith in Christ, plus keeping the stipulations of the old covenant system, that if you were going to be a Christian, you also had to become a Jew. You had to come in through the portal of Judaism. You had to be circumcised and you had to keep the regulations of the old covenant system.
In fact, Paul's epistle to the Galatians is devoted to exposing that very heresy. Much of the epistle to the Colossians is written to refute a form of it as well. OK, so that was the historical context in which those three passages in question were written.
Keys to Proper Interpretation: Paul's Focus on the Old Order
You follow me? All right. The second thing that we need to keep in mind is that Paul's focus in those passages is upon this problem of the old order. He's not discussing the new order in those passages.
His concern is with the Christians attitude toward those practices. That were associated with the old order, the old covenant. In other words, Paul is not discussing what practices are now in place in the new covenant. He's not discussing in those passages, the Lord's Supper or baptism or the observance of the Lord's day.
His focus is upon how the Christian is to respond to those practices that are associated with the old order. All right. Now, with those things in mind, we're ready to understand what Paul is talking about in these three passages. I just summarized it, but let's turn over to Romans 14.
Interpreting Romans 14:1-6
That's the first one.
Verses one to six.
Paul writes, receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things. For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables. Let not him who eats despise him who does not eat and let not him who does not eat judge him who eats for God has received him. Who are you to judge another 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 that each be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the day, observes it to the Lord. And he who does not observe the day to the Lord, he does not observe it. He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks.
And he who does not eat to the Lord, he does not eat and gives God thanks. Now, here Paul is dealing in Romans with a situation. By the way, if you. If you if you keep this in mind and skim through the book of Romans, you'll find that one of the major themes of the book of Romans, obviously, I think it's proper to argue that the major theme is justification by faith.
But underlying that, why is Paul arguing this point of justification by faith alone in the book of Romans? Well, one of the themes that underlies that whole book is the relationships between Jews and Gentiles in the church at Rome. And Paul is underscoring that we all are saved in the same way. Justification by faith alone, whether Jew or Gentile.
And apparently there were some tensions in the church in Rome between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians. And some of it had to do with baggage that they brought with them into the church. OK, particularly Jewish Christians who had certain scruples about certain things that they carried with them from their having grown up in the system for the old covenant Judaism. So, Paul, you had Christians in the church at Rome who still had scruples when it came to certain old order practices and observance, while you had other Christians who didn't.
Some were still observing various Jewish dietary restrictions and they were still observing the Jewish religious calendar. And this may have even included the observance of the Jewish seventh day Sabbath. It's not absolutely clear, but it may have included that as well. Or perhaps, as some have argued, the reference to days is speaking of other old covenant Jewish holidays.
Holy days. But there were others in the church who were not observing these days.
Many of them, no doubt, were Gentiles who never had a conscience toward those things. They'd never practiced those things. And they realized that those things were passing away. They didn't feel any attachment to the old Jewish holidays or holy days or dietary restrictions.
They understood that the old order has passed away. Their consciences were strong and clear about that.
Now, apparently. In Romans, the problem was not that those who continued some of those practices were saying that you're not saved if you're not doing them. It was simply the fact that these differences were causing a degree of tension in the church. There were some attitude problems that were there.
So Paul's emphasis in Romans 14 is upon liberty of conscience. Liberty of conscience. Those who still observed some of these old order practices were not to judge those who didn't. And those whose consciences were better informed and who did not observe them were not to despise those whose consciences were weak and still did.
All right.
Interpreting Galatians 4:8-11
Galatians 4. What was going on there? It's a different situation. It's a similar situation, but it's different.
Turn over to Galatians 4.
Now, if you know anything about Paul's letter to the Galatians, you'll remember Paul is addressing a much more serious problem than what we have in Romans 14. Here we have certain. Pseudo Christian, false Christian, professing Christian Jewish teachers who are actually dogging Paul's steps and they were denying the doctrine of justification by faith alone. And they were saying that faith in Christ alone is not enough.
You have to observe the practices of the old order, the Mosaic covenant in order to be a Christian, in order to be justified. You have to become Jews and follow Jewish practices. So here, this is not just a matter of differences of practice. And preference of the focus is still old order observances.
The issue at stake here was much more serious. And Paul's tone in Galatians is much more severe. You see, Paul could have Timothy circumcised in order to open doors of witness to the Jews. That was a matter of liberty of conscience.
But when people started saying you have to be circumcised in order to be right with God, Paul takes a strong, uncompromising stand against them. And this is what he does. This is what was happening in the churches in Galatia. And they were falling prey to this heresy.
So this is the context of what Paul says here in chapter 4, verse 10. You observe days and months and seasons and years. I am afraid for you, lest I have labored for you in vain. So when it came to old order practices, if they weren't being treated as good works by which we earn salvation, or if they weren't being forced on others, Paul can speak very mildly.
He can emphasize liberty of conscience. As he does in Romans 14. But when these things were being practiced in a way that denied justification by faith alone, his whole tone is different. If the Galatians were observing Jewish days and months and seasons and years as a means of gaining acceptance with God, Paul feared that his labors among them had been in vain.
So this letter is a very, I mean, when you read the letter of Galatians, I mean, Paul is burning with fervor and fire when he writes, this letter is a strongly written letter of warning.
And he really goes out after these false Jewish teachers who were teaching this. And he's exhorting the people of God to reject that teaching, that if they follow that teaching, they have fallen away from grace, he says, not in the sense they've lost their salvation, but they're falling away from the gospel.
Now, let me say that I see no reason to exclude the Jewish seventh day Sabbath from the list of things that Paul mentions here. In Galatians 4.10, months probably refers to the new moon festivals that we read about in Numbers 10. In Numbers 28, seasons seems to refer to the yearly feasts that occurred, various seasons of the year, such as Passover, Pentecost, Feast of Booths, and so on.
And years, no doubt, refers to the sabbatical years, the years of Jubilee. Therefore, it seems likely that the reference to days refers to the seventh day Jewish Sabbath, or other special holy days in the Jewish calendar. But why wouldn't he be referring to that? I mean, I would imagine that that would certainly be one of the old order practices that these Judaizers would have been pressing upon these Christians.
And you remember, it's the old Mosaic order that Paul is dealing with here, not the practices of the new order. Nothing Paul says here undermines the Sabbath principle rooted in creation, included in the moral law of the Ten Commandments. Or its application now in the new order to the Lord's Day. It doesn't do that any more than his reference to seasons, which includes the Passover, undermines the validity of the new covenant meal, the Lord's Supper.
Interpreting Colossians 2:16-17
OK, now let's look at that third passage. Here we have something similar to what we have in Galatians. It's not exactly the same, but it's similar. In this letter, when you read this letter, and it's Minnesota.
We studied this letter in his background. Paul's addressing a kind of hybrid heresy, a heresy that combined the Judaizers doctrine of salvation by works, including the observance of the old order. He combined that with a the ascetic philosophy of a kind of early kind of Gnosticism.
This was a philosophy that taught that Christ was an emanation from God through a series of lesser, divine, beings. And it also taught the worship of angels and abstinence from certain foods and from legitimate material and physical pleasures. This is what is meant by asceticism. Like when you think of a monk, monk living up in the cave somewhere, he's an ascetic.
Asceticism is the denial of legitimate material, earthly pleasures that God has given to us in the belief that that somehow, as a more holy to do that. So in chapter two, Paul has been establishing the supreme authority of Jesus Christ. And he's pointing out that Christ is not served by obedience to manmade laws, traditions or ceremonies, nor, as he points out in the text, as he served by observing the old Jewish dietary laws or the old order religious calendar. So here again, Paul is addressing a heresy that was retrograde, retrograde, retrograde, progressive in its character.
That is, it included going back to the practices and the observances of the old order. And you'll notice verse 16 says, So let no one judge you in food or in drink or regarding a festival or a new moon or Sabbath. Now, if I had time, I could show you that these three terms festival, new moon and Sabbath or Sabbath days that they're grouped together and mentioned together many times. In the Old Testament like this, you'll find the same triad mentioned in first Chronicles 2331, second Chronicles 248, 1331,
three Ezekiel 4517, Nehemiah 1033 and Hosea 211. Those things all grouped together, food, drink, festival, new moon, Sabbath, so on.
Now these terms are used, then, as a kind of general reference to the various days that the Old Covenant worshipper was to observe, including the seventh day Sabbath. Now, some interpret the word Sabbath here is not referring to the weekly Sabbath, and they argue that it only refers to certain special Sabbath days, particularly since it's in the plural, not the weekly seventh day Sabbath. Paul does say Sabbaths here, not the Sabbath. And they take that,
that route because they think that if we understand this to refer to the Jewish Sabbath that we're then somehow undermining the teaching of Scripture regarding the abiding authority of the fourth commandment for today. But I think that's a misunderstanding. I don't have a problem with viewing it as referring to either special Sabbaths or the Sabbath because Paul's not talking about the new order here. Again, he's talking about the old order, the Old Covenant seventh day, Jewish Sabbaths.
And in fact, if you check, check it, you'll find in the New Testament that whenever the New Testament writers use the term Sabbath, they're always referring to the seventh day Jewish Sabbath. The New Covenant Sabbath is referred to as the first day of the week or the Lord's Day. And really, I think it should be obvious to us why they do that. At that point, at that transitional point in history, the term Sabbath was universally associated with the Jewish seventh day observance.
When you said that, that's what it meant. If they referred to the Lord's Day with that same term, it would have been quite confusing. So it shouldn't trouble us if Paul is speaking of the Old Covenant Sabbath here because the Old Covenant Sabbath day has in fact been abolished. That's part of Paul's point.
Again, the issue being addressed here is the old order, not the new order. Paul is underscoring that this retrogressive teaching of these heretics in which they are trying to reintroduce the Old Covenant, religious calendar and are telling you that you have to observe the Jewish calendar in order to be right with God. This teaching is to be rejected by God's people. And now the reason that Paul gives for this is in verse 17, which are a shadow of things to come.
But the substance is of Christ. And indeed, these old order observances were shadows of the good things that have now come in Christ, the food and drink offerings. Pointed to Christ. The festivals such as Passover and Pentecost pointed to various things concerning the gospel, concerning Christ.
The monthly sacrifices of the new moon pointed to Christ and also the special Sabbath days, including the seventh day Sabbath, were a shadow that, in a sense, pointed to Christ. The Jewish Sabbath day at the end of the week anticipated the coming of the Messiah. The Jews, the Jews moved toward that coming with the six days of work preceding the seventh day of rest. When Christ actually came and died and he rose from the dead on the first day of the week, which the writers are at pains to emphasize that over and over, and he entered into his rest,
the rest of the new creation, the new creation that was accomplished and inaugurated on that day when he rose from the dead, which is the first day of the week. Thus, the Sabbath of the new order, looks back to a Christ who has already come. We work from the day of rest, the first day of the week, not toward the day of rest, the last day of the week, as the Jews did. So the Sabbath is no longer a shadow for us.
The Christian application of the fourth commandment points to the substance, which is Christ and his work on behalf of his people. The observance of the fourth commandment in the new creation is no longer the seventh day, Jewish Sabbath is the Lord's day, the day when Christ rested from his work of the new creation. So the old order seventh day Sabbath is obsolete. Now, that's why we would reject the arguments of the Seventh-day Adventists or a group that call themselves Seventh-day Baptists.
However, we still observe the fourth commandment, but not as a shadow, not as a mystery or a shadow of him who was to come. We observe it on the first day. As a sign and commemoration of the fact that he has come and that his work was finished on the first day. And we observe it as a sign and pointer to that eternal rest that is yet to come in the new heavens and the new earth.
When our Lord returns, God rested on the seventh day from his work of creation. Christ rested on the first day from his work of the new creation when he was raised from the dead, having accomplished and finished that work. You see, the seventh day Sabbath and the Christian Sabbath of the Lord's day are two similar institutions in that they both embody a common and abiding moral principle rooted in creation contained in the Ten Commandments. But at the same time, they are different institutions.
The one was a shadow or a mystery pointing forward to Christ. The other is not. The other is the body. It's not a shadow, but a testimony to the fulfillment that has been brought in by Christ.
Conclusion and Call for Charity
Well, that's a lot of stuff that I shot at you in one Sunday School lesson. But I want to at least give you the general picture of how these passages are to be approached and what Paul's talking about in these passages. And of course, the most obvious application this morning is that the New Testament church is not to observe the seventh day. As the Christian Sabbath, are we to observe the fourth commandment?
Yes, I hope I've demonstrated that to your conviction, to your understanding. Yes, we are. But these passages make it clear that we're not to observe the fourth commandment on the seventh day, the Jewish Sabbath. There's one other thing I feel I want to say.
I just have a few minutes here. I had several applications that I knew I wasn't going to be able to get to, but I put them in here. Anyhow, maybe I can some other time. But I did want to say, to be fair, that these difficult passages regarding the Sabbath should cause us to be patient and charitable, I believe, toward non-Sabbatarian brethren who disagree with us.
There are some who disagree, as you know, that the fourth commandment continues. And we've seen all the reasons why I believe they're very wrong about that and why that's not proper understanding of Scripture. But some of them are still committed to the public worship of Christ on the Lord's day. They still believe that the Lord's day is a special day for the Christian church, even going back to the apostles.
They've read these passages that we've looked at today, and it's caused them to believe that the Sabbath doesn't apply to us. And there are some very godly Christian people who believe that. And yet they're still committed to public worship on the Lord's day and even resting on the Lord's day. And I think we need to know that they just won't believe that the Lord's day is the Christian Sabbath because of these three passages.
Now. The fourth commandment to creation ordinance part of the Ten Commandments is a serious matter, and I'm convinced these people are wrong and I hope you are. But we still need to be charitable toward brethren like that, and I think more so with the fourth commandment than with any other of the Ten Commandments. And why do I say that?
Because I'm not aware of any other creation ordinance or commandment in the Decalogue that has problem texts like these in the New Testament for you. I can't think of any. How many Christian books have been written debating whether it's OK for Christians to steal under the New Covenant or to honor your father and mother or to commit adultery? I don't I don't I doubt you'll find any book debating whether or not those commands apply to us or any of the other nine.
You'll but you'll find a lot of books debating whether the Sabbath still applies. And probably the main reason is these three passages that we considered this morning. Well, I hope you've seen that these passages do not teach that the fourth commandment no longer applies to Christians. But I also hope you see why some sincere brethren have been confused about this.
So we need to be careful about our attitude toward others, how we judge others and be patient in our dealings with others seeking to lead them to the truth about this subject. We should do that while at the same time standing firm in our conviction and in our practice of the Lord's Day as the Christian Sabbath. All right. Now, next week, we get to the thing.
I think a lot of you probably just been kind of going like this. You know, when are we going to get to the issue of how are we to observe the Lord's Day? That's the issue we want to get to. What are we supposed to do and what are we not supposed to do?
Well, we're finally going to get to that next week after covering all of this. I don't know how many weeks we've been in this now, but now we're ready to take up that question. The proper and balanced observance of Christianity.
The Sabbath of the Fourth Commandment under the New Covenant. All right. I've taken all of our time this morning, so we're going to have to pray and break off our father. We thank you for this opportunity that we've had again to consider your holy word.
We thank you for it. We pray that we would grow in our appreciation, our understanding of it, not just in terms of individual texts here and there, but our understanding of the whole word of God and how it all fits and unfolds and flows together. That we might be. Guarded against every wind of doctrine that we might grow into Christian maturity, both in our understanding and in our practice.
So we pray that you would continue to guide us and to teach us now, help us as we prepare to gather here in this room again to sing your praises and to worship you. We do ask that your Holy Spirit would come and bless us and that you would draw near to us. We ask it in Christ's name. Amen.
This transcript was generated by automated speech recognition and may contain errors. It is provided for study and reference only; the audio recording is the authoritative source.
Passages Expounded
This passage is central to understanding Paul's teaching on liberty of conscience regarding days, which Martin interprets as referring to Old Covenant observances.
This passage is key to understanding Paul's strong condemnation of observing Old Covenant days as a means of justification, distinguishing it from the Sabbath principle.
This passage is crucial for explaining that Old Covenant festivals, new moons, and Sabbaths were 'shadows' fulfilled in Christ, but the moral principle of a day of rest remains.
Texts Expounded
Also Referenced
More from the archive
If this spoke to you, hear also…
-
-
A Conscientious and Joyful Sabbath Observance
Jeremiah 6:16
layers Walking in the Old Paths (conference series)
-
-
Historical Background
layers Christian Liberty (a)
-
-