In the Old Testament of the Bible God gave his law to Israel at Mount Sinai and ordered that they obey it. Within that law were moral commands (e.g. ‘do not murder’, ‘do not steal’, ‘do not commit adultery’ [Exodus 20:13–15], ‘love your neighbour as yourself’ [Leviticus 19:18]), civil commands (e.g. ‘Whoever steals an ox or a sheep and slaughters it or sells it must pay back five head of cattle for the ox and four sheep for the sheep’ [Exodus 22:1]), and ceremonial commands (e.g. laws regarding sacrifices to be made at the temple [Leviticus 1–7], laws regarding the priesthood [Leviticus 8], and laws regulating what foods were ‘clean’ and ‘unclean’ [Leviticus 11]). These laws can be found in what is known as the ‘Torah’, which are the first five books of the Old Testament written by the Prophet Moses.
When Jesus arrived we are told he fulfilled the law. As Jesus himself said;
Matthew 5:17
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.”
And for the most part, it’s clear what laws Jesus fulfilled so that a New Covenant believer is no longer obligated to obey them, and what laws we are still obligated to obey as an expression of the kind of love that we have been saved to express. Laws that a New Covenant believer are no longer obligated to obey include laws surrounding food restrictions and others regarding sacrifices at the temple in Jerusalem, since it should be clear that those laws were in place for a time, and were ‘shadows’ that prepared the nation of Israel for the coming of Jesus as Messiah.
We are thankful this is made clear in scripture, e.g. regarding food restrictions, it is written;
Mark 7:18–19
“Are you so dull?” he asked. “Don’t you see that nothing that enters a person from the outside can defile them? For it doesn’t go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body.” (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)
(See also, Acts 10:9–16)
And with respect to ceremonial laws, Jesus clearly taught that he was the fulfilment of the temple (John 2 :19–22), and we are taught that the sacrifices offered there were only a shadow to point us to Jesus’ once-and-for-all sacrifice, see Hebrews 10:1–14. This is why the New Covenant believer no longer needs a temple to worship God and no longer is required to offer animal sacrifices, although it was written in the law for an Old Covenant believer to obey.
This is also why the Apostle Paul spoke to the mixed congregations of Jews and Gentiles (‘Gentiles’ in this context are non-Jewish people who became disciples of Jesus) such as the one in Colossae and said to them;
Colossians 2:16–17
Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.
And so, though the ceremonial law was clearly fulfilled in Christ so that a New Covenant believer is no longer obligated to obey it, we are reminded that the moral law of God stands forever as the standard of what it means to ‘love your neighbour as yourself.’ This is why the commands ‘do not murder’, ‘do not commit adultery’, ‘do not steal’, etc., are repeated in the New Testament of the Bible, since love demands that I honour the life of my neighbour, his wife (or daughter) and his possessions.
The question is, what about the fourth commandment regarding the Sabbath? In the Old Testament the law is stated this way;
Exodus 20:8–11
“Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall labour and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.”
It is our position as a church is that this law is part of the ceremonial set of laws given to Israel that were fulfilled in Christ, and though it still functions to give shape to the work / rest rhythm that God has woven into creation, it is no longer to be obeyed as a 24 hour time period from 6pm on Friday to 6pm on Saturday as it was in the Old Testament, where a person was seen to be in sin and liable for disciplinary action if they were found doing anything on this day that could be defined as ‘work.’
Most obviously, we ground this conviction in the clear teaching of the New Testament on this topic. In three places in particular;
1. Hebrews 4:1–11 reads as follows, and notice the way the divine author relates the Sabbath to salvation, and the encouragement for us to enter that rest by properly responding to God’s word, not by obeying the fourth commandment.
1 Therefore, since the promise of entering his rest still stands, let us be careful that none of you be found to have fallen short of it. 2 For we also have had the good news proclaimed to us, just as they did; but the message they heard was of no value to them, because they did not share the faith of those who obeyed. 3 Now we who have believed enter that rest, just as God has said,
“So I declared on oath in my anger,
‘They shall never enter my rest.’”
And yet his works have been finished since the creation of the world. 4 For somewhere he has spoken about the seventh day in these words: “On the seventh day God rested from all his works.” 5 And again in the passage above he says, “They shall never enter my rest.”
6 Therefore since it still remains for some to enter that rest, and since those who formerly had the good news proclaimed to them did not go in because of their disobedience, 7 God again set a certain day, calling it “Today.” This he did when a long time later he spoke through David, as in the passage already quoted:
“Today, if you hear his voice,
do not harden your hearts.”
8 For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken later about another day. 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.
In clearly connecting the Sabbath of the Old Testament law to the rest that comes to the New Covenant believer through faith in Jesus, it shows us that Jesus has fulfilled this commandment, and since being fulfilled, we now experience the fullness of this rest by faith in him.
- Colossians 2:16–17
We touched on this above, but will state it again for clarity;
16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.
Here, the Apostle Paul clearly puts the Sabbath Day alongside religious festivals (e.g. Leviticus 23) and New Moon celebrations (e.g. Numbers 10:10), to make the point that since ceremonial laws of this nature were a shadow of the things that were to come but have now been fulfilled in Christ, a New Covenant believer is no longer required to obey them as law.
As was clearly stated in The Gospel Coalition article, Is the Sabbath Still Required for Christians? by Justin Taylor, October 14, 2020; (See below)
‘It is clear in Paul’s letters that the Sabbath is not binding upon believers. In Colossians Paul identifies the Sabbath as a shadow along with requirements regarding foods, festivals, and the new moon (Colossians 2:16–17). The Sabbath, in other words, points to Christ and is fulfilled in him. The word for “shadow” (skia) that Paul uses to describe the Sabbath is the same term the author of Hebrews used to describe Old Testament sacrifices. The law is only a “shadow (skia) of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities” (Hebrews 10:1). The argument is remarkably similar to what we see in Colossians: both contrast elements of the law as a shadow with the “substance” (sōma, Colossians 2:17) or the “form” (eikona, Hebrews 10:1) found in Christ. Paul does not denigrate the Sabbath. He salutes its place in salvation history, for, like the Old Testament sacrifices, though not in precisely the same way, it prepared the way for Christ. I know of no one who thinks Old Testament sacrifices should be instituted today; and when we compare what Paul says about the Sabbath with such sacrifices, it seems right to conclude that he thinks the Sabbath is no longer binding.’
- Romans 14:1–6
In this passage, the Apostle Paul speaks to the mixed congregation (Jew and Gentile) in Rome, in an effort to alleviate the tension that was present because of a misunderstanding and misapplication of Old Testament law. Many of the Jews who had become Christians carried with them over-sensitive consciences toward Old Covenant regulations that Jesus had set them free from. On the other hand, the Gentiles whose consciences were far too free having come out of Paganism needed to be taught what kind of moral behaviour was acceptable now that they had been grafted in to the body of Christ.
And so Paul says to them;
1 Accept the one whose faith is weak, without quarrelling over disputable matters. 2 One person’s faith allows them to eat anything, but another, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. 3 The one who eats everything must not treat with contempt the one who does not, and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them. 4 Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall. And they will stand, for the Lord is able to make them stand.
5 One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind. 6 Whoever regards one day as special does so to the Lord. Whoever eats meat does so to the Lord, for they give thanks to God; and whoever abstains does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God.
The broader principle here is that though there are differences in convictions, where they are not a matter of moral law or instructions that God intended to be obeyed by all believers, we must respect each other’s consciences. Paul cites two examples here: The first, eating meat; and the second, sacred days. And in both cases Paul teaches the church they are a matter of conscience, not law. If the Sabbath Day were a matter of law, this would be the place for Paul to make that clear, but as he did with his letter to the Colossians, what he makes clear is that the observance of special days, which would have clearly included the Sabbath Day, were no longer required for New Covenant believers.
(Paul makes the same point about the conscience in 1 Corinthians 8 and 10:14–33)
Again, from The Gospel Coalition article cited above;
‘John Barclay rightly argues that Paul subtly (or not so discreetly!) undermines the theological standpoint of the weak since he argues that what one eats and what days one observes are a matter of no concern. The Old Testament, on the other hand, is clear on the matter. The foods one eats and the days one observes are ordained by God. He has given clear commands on both of these issues. Hence, Paul’s argument is that such laws are no longer valid since believers are not under the Mosaic covenant. Indeed, the freedom to believe that all days are alike surely includes the Sabbath, for the Sabbath naturally would spring to the mind of Jewish readers since they kept the Sabbath weekly. Paul has no quarrel with those who desire to set aside the Sabbath as a special day, as long as they do not require it for salvation or insist that other believers agree with them.’
What’s more, though there were many opportunities for the Apostles to make it clear that the Sabbath Day was to be obeyed as a matter of law, they did not make that case. All of the 10 Commandments were re-stated in the New Testament of the Bible except for the fourth (regarding the Sabbath), and as we can see from the passages above, it’s because that command was a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ. And since that command has been fulfilled, the New Covenant believer is no longer required to obey it as a matter of law.
With the biblical witness so clear on this, we have to ask why our forefathers in the faith added the Sabbath command to the Reformed Westminster Confession and the 1689 Baptist Confession of faith. They state it this way;
Westminster Confession of Faith (1648)
This Sabbath is then kept holy unto the Lord, when men, after a due preparing of their hearts, and ordering of their common affairs beforehand, do not only observe an holy rest all the day from their own works, words, and thoughts, about their worldly employments and recreations; but also are taken up the whole time in the public and private exercises of his worship, and in the duties of necessity and mercy.
1689 Baptist Confession of Faith
The sabbath is then kept holy unto the Lord, when men, after a due preparing of their hearts, and ordering their common affairs aforehand, do not only observe a holy rest all day, from their own works, words and thoughts, about their worldly employment and recreations, but are also taken up the whole time in the public and private exercises of his worship, and in the duties of necessity and mercy.
(Note: The fact that both confessions are almost identical is intentional, since the Baptists of the 17th Century wanted to confirm their unity with the reformed theology of their Presbyterian brothers wherever possible, and to make clear where the differences were, e.g. the administration of baptism, church polity [governance], and the relationship between the Old and New covenants).
As we read the articles above from each confession we’d be wise to keep in mind that these are not divinely inspired as we believe the scriptures are, but an attempt to articulate the truth that is found in scripture. So even as we consult councils and creeds from the past we have to be willing to measure them against our ultimate authority, which is the Bible. And when we do this, we believe our brothers who articulated these confessions have misunderstood how a New Covenant believer should regard the Old Testament Sabbath command.
Since both state that the Sabbath is to be kept ‘all the day’, and that Christians are to give themselves to a particular definition of public and private worship ‘the whole time’, then any work, word or thought that they categorise as ‘worldly’ or ‘recreational’ should be categorised as ‘sin’.
As we compare these words with those quoted in the scriptures above, we have concluded that our 17th century brothers (known as ‘Puritans’) laid a burden on the church that Christ himself did not intend for them to carry. But this is where a little context is helpful.
The Puritans were English Protestants from the 17th century and there was a lot to love about them. They took their faith seriously, they were fully committed to Jesus and his word, and they applied themselves to the principle of seeking first the Kingdom of heaven in all things. Modern evangelicals who are serious about doctrine and have the discernment to see the way worldliness has crept into the modern church appreciate a lot of what the Puritans had to say. In many respects, we continue to fight the battles they fought 400 years ago.
However, we also need the discernment to identify where the zeal of our Puritan brothers led them toward legalism. Some of the most obvious examples include;
State-enforced religious observance; the banning of all ‘entertainment’ on Sundays; enforcing laws regarding dress codes based on the believer’s social status (e.g. ‘finery’ such as silver, gold, silk and lace were only permitted if you were classified as ‘wealthy’; a restriction on how many ‘decorative cuts’ were allowed on sleeves; the forbidding of certain hats and elaborate needlework for people who were regarded to be below a certain social ‘rank’, etc.); the banning of Christmas celebrations and other ‘man-made traditions’; what many sound theologians would regard as an unhealthy reluctance to give assurance of salvation for believers until they were later on in their lives and had undergone ‘intense spiritual struggle’; regarding hunting as a sin against both the conscience and nature, regarding such recreational sports as a ‘waste of time’, a ‘spiritual danger’, and a sign of a ‘corrupted heart’; that playing cards was a sin because it was a ‘frivolous distraction’ from devotion to God, etc.
Not all Puritans agreed on all the above, but they’re a good example of the kind of legalism that modern day Christians need to be aware of as we learn from them – and we have a lot to learn from them!
But all that to say, when we read 17th century Puritan documents like the Westminster Confession and the 1689 Baptist Confession we have to be mindful of the theological tendencies that exist as a result of their social and theological contexts, and be willing to measure it against scripture before we believe it. And with regard to the Puritan understanding of the New Covenant believer’s requirement to observe a strict obedience of the Sabbath, as a church, we don’t believe this is in alignment with what we see in scripture.
One more argument to make the point above is that the Puritan conviction regarding the Sabbath command is unique even among theologians in church history.
To name a few, Ignatius (2nd century), Augustine (4th – 5th century), Thomas Aquinas (13th century), John Calvin and Martin Luther (16th century) all believed that the Old Testament Sabbath law was a ‘shadow rite’, and not to be equated with ‘The Lord’s Day’ that is spoken of throughout the New Testament, but a promise ‘… fulfilled in Christ, in whose presence all the old figures vanish.’
In summary, we are thankful for our Puritan brothers and even those in our own day who are eager to do all that the Lord commands, but we believe that observing the Old Testament Sabbath command as articulated in the Puritan confessions of faith is not in alignment with the teaching of scripture. We also believe this kind of strict observance binds the consciences of believers to commands that our Lord Jesus did not intend.
We believe the Lord Jesus is the fulfilment of the Old Testament Sabbath command, and that we rest from our work when we put our faith in him, who obeyed the law perfectly on our behalf, so we can have peace with God through faith in him.
We believe the model of six days work with one day’s rest in every working week is the biblical pattern that we’d be wise to follow, but are not bound to by divine law.
We believe that Sunday is ‘The Lord’s Day’ when churches will ordinarily meet since it was on that day Jesus rose from the dead.
We do not believe Jesus or the Apostles ever taught that ‘The Lord’s Day’ should be equated to the Old Testament law regarding the Sabbath.
We believe Christians are in sin if they do not meet with the church when it ordinarily gathers because of the clear command in scripture to do so (e.g. Hebrews 10:24–25).
We believe that since there is nothing better for Christians to do on The Lord’s Day than to sit under God’s word together and encourage one another in their common faith in the Lord, the desire to do less meaningful things is a sign of spiritual immaturity, not sin.
And we also believe, in line with Paul’s teaching in Romans 14, that if members of the church were convicted to obey a stricter observation of the Sabbath day, they should not be looked down upon, neither should they look down on others who do not share their convictions. As Paul said to the church in Rome;
Romans 14:5
One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind.
Want to find out more?
Please reach out to us below