6 Comments on “The Sabbath – “A Shadow of Things To Come””

1. God swears in His wrath that they that don’t believe this will never enter into His rest. He rested on the 7th day. All His work was completed. We are saved from the foundation of the world. We are saved before birth. God chose us In HIM before He even created the world and we have no choice in this matter. Thanks be to God. With men it’s impossible but with God All things are possible.

   Reply
2. 9 There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; 10 for anyone who enters God’s rest also rests from their works, just as God did from his. 11 Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will perish by following their example of disobedience. There is still a day we take of?
   We also, rest from our works. Is this right.

   Reply
3. Dear Sir, you are greatly mistaken. Please consider – Adam and Eve were not Jews, yet God gave them the precious gift of the Sabbath day and we are all their descendants. Yes the day had a special covenantal significance for Old Testament Israel and that has now gone, but the day remains albeit the Lord of the Sabbath has transferred it to His resurrection day, Sunday. Why are you so determined to throw away one of God’s greatest gifts to mankind?
   Alan

   Reply
   • “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.” (Exodus 20:8-11)

     Our text plainly says that the Sabbath day is the seventh day; a point which we wish to strongly emphasize in this article. We do believe a very great misconstruction of the Scriptures has been done in attempting to transfer the Sabbath day from the seventh day of the week to the first, and making it a so-called Christian Sabbath for believers in the gospel age we now live in. We also believe it fairly impossible for those who hold to and teach a Christian Sabbath, to prove their position; either from the Bible, or from history. We full well recognize that such a statement will bring much criticism, and, even bitter dissent against us, for even suggesting that the Christian has no specific calendar Sabbath at this time. However, we feel it necessary to take our stand here, and to reaffirm the clear, plain, and obvious teaching of the Word of God; that believers are not under law but under grace. And too, that statement will no doubt bring additional criticism and distress among the legal day-keepers; and if our present feeling is not changed by our Lord, we will have to say, humbly, “So be it.”

     We are continually bombarded with articles on the Christian Sabbath in Baptist papers, which we either receive by subscription or exchange. It seems that the notion of this Christian Sabbath is an increasingly important point among some today; to the extent that the writers of the same will bombast, vilify, and condemn those who cannot agree with them, or walk with them in this purely old covenant, legal way. Within a three-week period we noticed four different papers with articles on this subject. All condemned what they call Sabbath breakers (those of us who differ with them) and those who will not walk with them in their legal precept. Some were more critical than others, but all contended that God’s children today were as much obliged to observe the Sabbath as the Israelites were when the commandment was first given them in the wilderness by Moses. It would seem that if the believing remnant was to observe one particular day out of the week as a Christian Sabbath that we would have clear and concise instruction from the Word of God on when this was begun, and how we are to perform it. However, this is not the case! As we previously stated, there is not one shred of evidence that such is so.

     Let us first consider briefly what the Sabbath is, according to the Bible. From our text we learn that the seventh day was the Sabbath of the LORD. It was a time for no work and the basis for its existence was that the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that was in them in six days, and rested on the seventh day. As says the text, “Wherefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.” You will notice that the word “Sabbath day” and “seventh day” here mean one and the same thing. This is the day the Israelites were to remember as the day their LORD rested. So clearly, the Sabbath day was a day of God’s rest, and they, from His example, were to rest on the seventh day, so long as they lived under that economy. But, does that still apply today to the Child of God that has found rest in Jesus? By no means.

     In Exodus 3 1:12-17 it was clear that the fourth commandment was different from all the others, in that it alone was a sign given by God. As we read, “For it (the Sabbath) is a sign between me and you throughout your generations.” Without lengthening the argument at this point it seems very plain that no one was intended here but the Israelites and their generations to whom this commandment or sign was originally given. It is also to be seen that all violators of this sign or commandment were to meet with sure and certain punishment. They were to be cut off from among the people, and put to death. They were allowed to work six days, but on the seventh was the Sabbath of rest, and it was holy to the LORD. Anyone who violated this day was to surely be put to death. We ask; are those who are so intent upon enjoining a Sabbath day upon us in this day, as willing to enjoin upon us the penalties of its violation? If we have today the same Sabbath principles, do we not also have today the same Sabbath protections against its violation? Wherein has one changed, and the other not? Or one remain the same, and the other not? We fail to see any consistency among those who lead us down this legalistic path to a Sabbath ordinance.

     The idea of a Christian Sabbath seems to stem from the mistaken notion that there was at some point a change in the day the Sabbath was to be observed; from the seventh day to the first. However, when we begin to look through the New Testament for some indication of this, we find that a record of this supposed change simply does not exist. There is no text, or texts, which tells us anything of the kind. There is nothing stated, nor is there anything even implied, that the seventh day was changed to the first after the resurrection of Jesus our Lord. We fully concur, and believe with others, that the disciples met upon the first day of the week; that they broke bread upon the first day of the week, and many other things according to their worship was upon the first day of the week. We agree that the Scripture is plain that John was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day. But none of these things tell us that there was any definite break from the seventh to the first in order that we might have a specific day of legal rest. These things in themselves do not create a “Sabbath Day” by which we are legally bound to its observance. Conjecture is the best that can be said for this position. We further, in examining the Scriptures, find that no where did the Apostles teach, or act out in such a way, a doctrine that God’s children today must take one day out of seven, and set it apart to do nothing but worship. That worship is enjoined upon God’s children, and assembling likewise, we heartily concur; but that it must be carried out on one specific day is a point we fail to find in our Bibles.

     We believe there are three wrong assumptions in this very erroneous view of the Christian Sabbath. The first wrong assumption is that the Sabbath was, in some unspecified manner, changed from the seventh day to the first at some point after the resurrection of our Lord. The second being that it became the believer’s particular day of rest. And the third is that it was commanded us by God as law to observe the first day of the week. We fairly conclude that all of these positions are no more than bare assumptions with not one single “Thus sayeth the Lord.” If it could be proved that the Lord’s people are to gather on the first day of the week, and that alone, it still would not prove that was the Sabbath day. It has been believed by God’s children for so long as there has been a people on this earth saved by grace, that they rest in Christ and not in days; that they cease from their labor when they are brought into union and communion with their Lord, and not by observing any legal periods of time. God’s children have found the Christian Sabbath to be little more than a renewing of the Israelitish ceremonies and ordinances that were given to those ancient people for their social rule of life and behavior, for that period of time when they walked in the wilderness, and were governed in Canaan’s land of promise. And, that we have a commandment as law to observe the first day of the week for a Christian Sabbath, we consider to be a grave error, and we wish not to be bound by it.

     Let it be plainly understood that the true followers of the Lamb have no desire to defile themselves, or transgress the Lord’s injunctions by living wantonly before the world, or by themselves, for that matter. The children of the Most High would live the strictest life, could they but by grace do so; but they as well vehemently deny that they are governed by legalistic principles, that say “do this, and do not do that” regarding their rest in Jesus. Is not this something akin to what Peter taught when he said “Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?” Acts 15:10.

     There are three additional texts in this connection which we wish to address. The first is Romans 13:8-10:

     “Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law. 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 neighbor as thyself. Love worketh no ill to his neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.”

     In verse nine the portion of the ten commandments which deals with the relationship of one man toward another is listed; adultery, murder, stealing, lying, covetousness. Those commandments which embrace the relationship of man to God were comprehended, as Paul said, “If there be any other commandment.” But of them all, Paul clearly embraces the gospel way when he said they were comprehended in this, namely, “Thy shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” Love was the fulfilling of the law. Thus, if love fulfills the law towards man regarding his commandment relationships to them, does not also love fulfill the law in our commandment relationships toward our God? Did not our Lord teach the same thing in the Gospels? (Matthew 22:34-40, Luke 25:28.) Then what of a supposed commandment regarding a particular day for worship? It was certainly not embraced in this text, for here, rather than singling out a time frame in which God’s children are required to legally serve their God, they find that the new relationship which God has worked in their hearts has bound them together in all of the commandments, and that is that God first loved them, and they love Him. And to the ability that He gives them in grace, they now serve Him. Not from a principle of commandment, but a principle of love.

     The second text we wish to observe is Ephesians 2:15:

     “Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace.”

     Paul instructs the church at Ephesus that something was abolished, and he describes it as the “law of commandments contained in ordinances.“ We do not believe that Paul taught that the law was abolished, or that commandments were abolished; but that rather, legal commandments that were contained in ordinances were abolished. Ordinances here means those systems of rigor and service enjoined upon the Israelites for their dispensation.

     This same line of thought is found also in Colossians 2:14

     “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.”

     Here it was the “handwriting of ordinances” being blotted out, whereas in Ephesians it was the “law of commandments contained in ordinances” that was abolished. In one a blotting out; in the other an abolishing. In one, a handwriting of ordinances; in the other the law of commandments contained in ordinances. So then it is very clear that it was ordinances from which the child of God was freed. And it was further stated in the Colossian epistle that they were not to be judged in respect of Sabbath days (verse 16), for they were but a shadow of things to come (verse 17), whereas the Body was Christ.

     Can it not be seen from these three texts that sabbath-keeping as a legal duty or precept was done by the Israelites, as was all other things in the Old Testament, to set forth in type and shadow, as well as in figures, things to come? The Sabbath prefigured in its legal sense the Spiritual rest the children of God found in Jesus. This is why, today, the child of God can rest in Jesus seven days of the week, and not just one. This is why the child of God can scorn the exhortation of the legalist, when they demand of us that we follow after the things which they think makes for Christian morality. This is true freedom and gospel liberty, which can be found only in Christ our Lord, and revealed by the Holy Ghost to the elect.

     Finally, it seems necessary for us to set forth the error of one article we recently read concerning the Christian Sabbath. May we emphasize that we have no desire to act in an evil way toward the publisher of this article, but rather to show what we believe to be the truth, as opposed to error.

     “The desecration of the Lord’s Day is the most noticeable and perhaps the worst evil of this generation that hath forgotten God. The loud cry always goes up when any mention is made of keeping the Lord’s Day holy: ‘We are under grace, not under the law.’ To tell you the truth, I am getting sick in my stomach at people excusing their ugly sins by waving the banner of grace.”

     “God sets the day apart and requires us to remember it in the Fourth Commandment. Remembering the Lord’s Day is not a matter of Christian liberty, i.e., something neither commanded nor forbidden by God. Rather, it is law, the law of God just as are the matters of having no other gods, honoring our parents, and not stealing. It is the commandment of the Redeemer to His saved people. It is a commandment that at once teaches us to know our sinful nature more and more, so that we fly to Christ for righteousness, and directs us in the way of pleasing our Deliverer and of living a happy life. it is a commandment that the thankful believer gladly obeys, as a child willingly obeys the father whom he loves.” (Two separate paragraphs from an exchange paper.)

     In the first paragraph, where we supplied italics, it was seen that the writer used the language “keeping the Lord’s day holy”. We do not accuse him of doing anything sinister, but it is clear he is, whether willingly or unwillingly, attempting to rewrite the Bible. We are not told anything in God’s Word about “keeping the Lord’s day holy”. The Children of Israel were told to “remember the Sabbath day”, but the keeping of the Lord’s day holy is something we are not familiar with. It will also been seen that the writer did not think too highly of the banner of grace, and attempted to accuse those who denied his legal Sabbath of trying to “hide their ugly sins under the banner of grace,” when nothing could be further from the truth.

     In the second paragraph, the same error is observed. Again, the words in italics, “remembering the Lord’s day”. Was it not in the Scriptures the Sabbath day that was to be remembered and not the Lord’s day? The next thing in italics, he says, “rather it is law”. This is what he describes as “remembering the Lord’s day;” that it is law for us. We ask then fairly, again, “Are we under law or grace?” This writer would have us to be under law, as he plainly sets forth. Next he says “it is a commandment of the Redeemer to His saved people”. If it is a commandment, we desire humbly to know where this commandment is written.

     And so the message goes, continually. The Sabbath day and the Lord’s day are supposed by the legalists to be one. God’s children, we are told we are to observe them with vigor and rigor, as though they were walking yet with Moses in the wilderness. We say honestly and openly to those; be not deceived, God is not mocked. We are free, brethren, to worship our God at any time, and the Scriptures say nothing about the 1st day of the week being our Sabbath, legal or otherwise. It is true, we are not free to sin; we are not free to walk with the world, and we are not free to violate the Lord’s plain teachings. Neither do we desire to do so. But we are not willing to be placed under a yoke for the satisfaction of legalists. If they desire to observe a Sabbath, that is fine with us. But we desire the privilege to walk with the Bible in our hand, and abstain from their course.

     J.F. Poole – 1990

     Reply
   • I am convinced that one would have to approach the scriptures with a mindset of Sabbath-keeping in order to arrive at the conclusions and interpretations that are set forth in these studies.  If a man was taught the gospel of free grace in JESUS CHRIST without the injection of the legalistic mindset of “reformation theology” he would never arrive at these conclusions.  An honest and straightforward reading of the new testament without this preconceived mindset would in no way allow a man to conclude that Hebrews 4:9 meant that he should observe a particular day of the week as a holy day before GOD.  One has to be a spiritual contortionist to build this case not to mention the references of the “first day of the week” as meaning a Sabbath.   Such reasoning must be placed in the hands of those whose “much learning” has made them mad.  Then the willing disciples of those “teachers of the law” which seem to have no true understanding of the law or what they affirm come along parroting their legalism as some actual high form of freedom.

                 I would like to discuss the practice of Sabbath keeping with you on a practical basis according to your experience rather than the philosophical aspects of it which are propounded by others. It might be helpful for you to know that I am not ignorant of the Sabbath-keeping mindset.  When I first became exposed to the gospel of free grace I devoured the writings of the puritans and other reformed type people such as John Murray, Dabney, Arthur Pink, Walter Chantry, etc.  I was a subscriber to the Banner of Truth and several other “high brow” publications.  I was thoroughly indoctrinated into the “moral law” teaching and actually believed it to be part and parcel of gospel preaching.  As time went on and the LORD revealed to me more and more of the corruption of my own heart and the inability of the flesh to keep the law of GOD in any sense this very teaching became a ball and chain around my neck.  I knew I should keep the Sabbath (for instance) but found that all of my attempts ultimately resulted in religiosity and disdain for those who did not “keep” it according to my own definition of what was proper.  One of the things that I observed among the “Sabbath keepers” that I was acquainted with is that each had his own parameters that defined a “proper” keeping of it and woe be to those who thought to exercise any sort of liberty of conscience in these matters. I have known of some “keepers” who have actually refrained from attending the meetings of GOD’s saints together because they would have to drive “too far” to do so and would therefore violate certain strictures.  Others told their children they could go out and swing on the swing set as long as they sang hymns and did not drag their feet in the sand.  Now these are no doubt aberrations upon what you consider to be a proper keeping of “the” day but they demonstrate the deathly nature of a legalistic mindset in my opinion.

                 Man in his fleshly and “religious” nature delights in a “law principle”.  He likes being told that performing  a certain activity while avoiding another can somehow make him pleasing in GOD’s sight.  Even the truly regenerate sons of GOD are not immune to this influence and all manner of religiosity can be stirred up in them as they willingly imbibe teaching that fans these flames.  The man who has become convinced by the SPIRIT of GOD of his innate religious corruption can only come to view his own inability to keep the law and see that all of his law keeping is performed by HIS REDEEMER who has fulfilled it in its jot and tittle.  The question of “keeping” the “moral law” (I use this phrase only because others use it, not because I believe there is any such thing outside of JESUS CHRIST) always ultimately centers on “keeping the Sabbath”.  Because it is understood that the “keeping” of all of the other commandments must ultimately be done “spiritually” and the keeping of them may be done without observation of the flesh.  In other words we could observe a man committing adultery or robbing a bank and know him to be a lawbreaker but we cannot see him look upon a woman with lust in his heart or a having a covetous desire to steal another mans possession. Yet we are convinced that to do so according to the LORD is to violate the law.  So along comes “Sabbath keeping” as something which is totally observable and a basis upon which a man can be seen to be righteous.  There can be no equivocation on this according to the sabbatarians, they must have something they can see.  There can be no “Sabbath keeping” in the heart, it must be done with observable activity (or non-activity as the case may be.)

                 All of the discussions I have ever had with “law keepers” has always ultimately come around to the matter of “Sabbath keeping”.  I almost feel sometimes that some of them feel that a being a good “Sabbath keeper” more or less offsets ones inability to keep the more subtle qualities of the “law”.  To fail in any part of the law is to fail completely so it baffles me how that anyone can consider themselves a “law keeper” especially of the “moral law”.

                 The amazing aspect of “law keeping” is that until a man is convinced of his own inability to keep the “law” can he ever have a true respect unto it, as long as he sees it as something he “should” keep or “does” keep he is still in darkness as to the high and holy nature of its precepts not to mention being still bound by its principle.  The truth of the matter boils down to this, the sons of GOD are made new creatures with a mindset and desire to please the LORD in all that they do.  The principle of the “Spirit of life in CHRIST JESUS” alone can set a man free from the principle of “sin and death” which is do this and live.  As long as a man only sees obedience to CHRIST as a “moral duty” that man is acting under a principle of law.  When a man is made a new creature he serves the LORD not out of “moral duty” but because he desires to.  My flesh tells me to look upon women as objects of lust but the SPIRIT of life in CHRIST JESUS causes me to war against that and brings me to repent of my bent towards that which is not pleasing in HIS sight.  I don’t have to read the “ten commandments” each time I pass the bank in order for me not to run through the door with a gun in my hand and commit robbery.  The LORD works in us both to will and to do of HIS good pleasure and the life which we now live in the flesh we live by the faith OF the SON of GOD.   If a man’s heart has not been changed by the new birth he cannot ultimately be subdued by the “moral law” and if he is born again he does not need the motivation of “law duty” in order for him to walk according to that for which he is ordained.

     Reply
     • “Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctifed it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.”
       (Genesis 2:1-3)

       There are several things that are necessary for us to understand the meaning of the Sabbath as it is revealed in Scripture. These teachings are necessary in both a positive and negative sense.

       The positive has to do with the true meaning of the Sabbath and the negative has to do with numerous errors that permeate the teachings of those who would put the believer under the law.

       The most important thing about the Sabbath is found in our text in the first three verses of the second chapter of Genesis. We will look at this as the last point in the message. First, we will consider the other things.

       What is the Sabbath as to a day?

       It is the seventh day of the week. It is part of the Jewish economy and was never given to the Gentiles to observe. The Sabbath day begins on Friday night at sunset and ends on Saturday night at sunset, aligning with the concept of evening and morning, darkness to light, defining a day. The LORD did not institute this as a day to be observed until it was given in the 10 commandments written in stone and given to Moses on Sinai, after the deliverance of Israel by the blood of the Lamb. In the ceremonial aspect of the Law, there were 8 Sabbaths, each with a singular precept that was true to all. There was no service work to be done and this was explicitly set forth in every case because regardless of what Sabbath was observed, it was observed to remind the observer that the work was finished, God and done the work and there was nothing for humanity to do. This was always the message.

       Over time, religion, even Christianity, so called, because of religion’s natural bent to operate under the law, decided to change the Sabbath day, to the frst day of the week and call Sunday the new Sabbath. That is simply not true. The first day of the week, the day that celebrated the LORD’s resurrection, the day when believers gather to worship the LORD is not the Sabbath, this called, in the New Testament, the LORD’s Day.

       It is not however by command of God but rather by following the example of the early church. There is no evidence that the Sabbath was observed in scripture, or even mentioned until Moses referred to it in Exodus 16 and the giving of manna and quail to the sojourning Israelites (twice the daily amount was gathered on Friday before sunset, so no work was done on Saturday). They were to rest and enjoy what the LORD had provided. Adam, Abel, Abraham, or Noah is never said to observe the seventh day as different from any other. In religion, the Sabbath has evolved into simply another way for selfrighteousness to rest its ugly head. Those raised in false religion know how the Sabbath has been used to accuse and excuse behaviour of what religious falsely refers to as the new Sabbath (washing the car on Sunday).

       Since the Sabbath day was given in the Law of Sinai, legalist religion pretty much disregards the other seven Sabbaths and relegates the Sabbath to a day. This is religious error and makes men accountable to do the whole law.

       The believer is not under the law at all….at all!

       Sabbath Means Rest

       The word “Sabbath” means rest and for a particular reason.
       Rest, not because one is tired from labor but because the work is finished and there is nothing left to be done. This is clearly stated in our text (vv. 1-3). The LORD has finished the work of creation (typifying new creation, salvation by Christ). Having finished the work, He rested, He sanctified the seventh day, set it apart, regarded it as holy because, “in that He had rested from all His work.” The day was set apart to be observed as a remembrance that the LORD had finished the work. Sabbath means rest. What rest? His rest! It is God’s rest that is observed.

       When the law was given on Sinai, it was the only law that was explicitly explained (Exodus 20:8-11). It was to be observed to remember that the LORD had finished the work. It was given to man, not that he might use it as evidence of his righteousness but as a remembrance that the LORD has finished His work…the Sabbath is God’s Sabbath.

       Move forward a few millennia, to a hill outside Jerusalem. There on Friday, as the Sabbath day approaches, the Son of God is hung on a tree. He is there to finish the work of the new creation, the salvation of that elect remnant. From that cross, He cried with a loud voice, “It is finished” and gives up the ghost. He is summarily taken from the cross and entombed.

       Having finished the work, He enters into His rest because He had finished the work. The next day was the Sabbath, and He rested and the next day, Sunday, He arose to ascend on high to receive the title of LORD, which He earned being obedient unto death. Our salvation is His rest. We entered into His rest and at the appointed time were given faith to believe and therefore rest in Him because He finished work (Hebrews 4:9-11-marg. “keeping
       of the Sabbath”).

       Gospel Rest

       The Gospel celebrates that the work of salvation is finished, and it is Christ who finished it. Having finished it, He sat down on the right hand of the majesty on High and in the matter of salvation there is nothing for the elect to do…nothing…they have entered in Christ’s rest. The believer keeps the Sabbath every day and the believer is the only one who does. He doesn’t keep a day, he keeps the rest of the person who finished the work of his salvation. Every believer is a Sabbath keeper. It is the LORD’s rest, the LORD’s Sabbath.

       —————

       Tim James

       Reply