Why Worship On Sundays?

October 16, 2012

This past week I had a close encounter with a Seventh Day Adventist. It provided me with an opportunity to rethink the underpinnings of Sunday worship. Why did the day we worship change?

The Sabbath is about God entering his rest at the conclusion of creation. Genesis 2:1-3 says: “Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.  And on the seventh day God finished his work that he had done, and he rested on the seventh day from all his work that he had done. So God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it God rested from all his work that he had done in creation.” The celebration of this rest became mandatory for God’s people in the Mosaic economy (Exodus 20:8-11 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor, 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, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant, or your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates. For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.”).

The Sabbath is tied to creation and has a lasting significance. On balance, the command to remember it comes from Moses. We have been released from the Mosaic Law (Romans 7:4 “Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God.”). We can’t use the 10 Commandments as support for Saturday worship. We died to the law.

We derive our primary direction from the New Testament, the law of Christ (1Corinthians 9:21, Galatians 6:2). In the NT there are two things to note in relation to the Sabbath. First, Jesus seems to have at least relax the Sabbath requirement by allowing the disciples to harvest grain on the Sabbath (Mark 2:23-27). He also said that the Sabbath was made for man (Mark 2:27). Second, while the other nine commandments are reiterated in the New Testament, the command to keep the Sabbath is missing. So to summarize to this point, the Mosaic commands are no longer binding on believers and the source of our direction, the New Testament, doesn’t command us to keep the Sabbath. Paul in Colossians 2:16 tells his readers to “let no one pass judgment on you … with regard to … a Sabbath.” This verse is as clear as it gets. We shouldn’t let anyone judge us in regards to keeping the Sabbath. Our Adventist friends tell us that Sunday worship is the mark of the beast (Seventh-day Adventists Believe (2nd ed). Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists. 2005. p. 196.).

While we don’t have a specific command to gather on the first day of the week, we do find Apostolic evidence of this practice. Acts 20:7 says, “On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul talked with them, intending to depart on the next day, and he prolonged his speech until midnight.” It seems that the church is gathering for worship on Sunday. 1Corinthians 16:2 (NLT) says, “On the first day of each week, you should each put aside a portion of the money you have earned. Don’t wait until I get there and then try to collect it all at once.” Again, it seems that the church gathered on the first day of “each” week.

My Adventist friend the other day suggested that the apostolic direction was perhaps wrong. Maybe they didn’t have the authority to change the day. Of course, if the apostoles were wrong about this, why not other stuff? So, why was the day changed? Remember the Sabbath was about God resting from his work. Believers now rest not on the day God finished the old creation but rather on the day Christ finished his work of the new creation. Jesus rose on the first day of the week. We worship on Sunday, the Lord’s Day (Revelation 1:10), to celebrate his rest and to symbolize our rest in Christ’s work (Hebrews 4:9-10). Think of it this way: the New Covenant brought many changes. The place of worship, the priesthood, the sign of the covenant, and many other things were changed. Doesn’t it make sense that the day of worship changed as well?

So, how do we respond to this? First, there is a continuing place for the Sabbath principle. Remember, this principle goes back to creation. Look at my post from the other day. Remembering that the Sabbath was made for man, we neglect it at our own peril. I think (for what that’s worth) that evangelicals are much too cavalier with regard to this principle. Perhaps I’ve listen too much to the Puritans in this area. This is a gift from God to his people. Second, don’t let anyone judge you with regard to the Sabbath. Third, it seems the best day to practice the Sabbath principle is Sunday. Finally, it isn’t always possible to keep this Sabbath principle on Sunday. If this is true for you, find another day to rest and worship with God’s people.

Questions? Comments?

Advertisements

13 Responses to “Why Worship On Sundays?”

  1. ancientcures Says:

    As we talked about, the Emphasis on Saturday and not the Gospel detracts from the message of the Cross. Thanks for this post and may the 7th Dayers repent of calling anyone who Worships on Sunday a child of the devil. We are Born Again, Blood Bought Christians and should be afforded the same courtesy we afford others.

  2. phfs9 Says:

    First, may I ask if you would expound on “We died to the law”. I would welcome more input on that text.

    Next, ancientcures, just clock up the encounter with the 7th Day Adventist as a close encounter of the SDA kind! hehe! That is pretty much all the energy it is worth investing in. I seriously doubt God ever meant for us to get very left winged or eccentric about what we learn from the Bible. I do believe that religions who take that path do nothing to encourage people to join in their beliefs.

    Next, I have heard many a debate on what is considered the first day of the week. Some say Monday, some say Sunday and some say Saturday. Science tells us that with the slippage of time each year we actually may not be currently in say 2012. Does that make sense? Science says there is every possibility that Jesus was born in June and not December again due to the slippage in time over the years. Science, of course, does not rule Christianity but I can see some sense in it at times when you mesh it with Christianity.

    I feel the remark made to “pick another day” if you are unable to make Sunday your Sabbath to honor is a treasure of a thought. I truly believe that if you cannot make Sunday your Sabbath to honor, God is really happy to have you choose a day you are able to set aside for honoring Him. Maybe He doesn’t care so much about the day of the week as He does about the dedication of your heart.

    • Mark Says:

      We died to the law in the sense that it is no longer our source of direction. The law never saved anyone. Paul is clear about this in the book of Romans and Galatians. Everyone who is saved is saved by faith. Paul’s point in Romans 7 is that the Mosaic law is no longer our source of direction since it doesn’t work (Ro 7:5). It always kills and spurs us to sin.

      I do think that we can make any day our worship day since we don’t have a command to focus on Sunday. Yet, and you’ll expect me to say this, I think the example of the early church and the symbolism of worshiping on the day Jesus rested makes Sunday the best day to worship. How’s that for talking out of both sides of my mouth. Paul doesn’t say choose your day to worship and then take up an offering. He says, “On the first day of the week…”

      As to what day is the first day of the week, I don’t see much wiggle room here. In our culture, indeed I believe in most every culture, Sunday is the first day of the week. Look at most any calendar and this is evident. This also seems to be case in the NT. Even if there is slippage of some sort, whatever first day of the week is in any culture, it seems that it would be the best day to set aside for rest and worship.

      • phfs9 Says:

        Thank you for the explanation in regard to “we died to the law”. I think I need to include that topic in my home Bible study.

        Please understand, I was not suggesting it is acceptable for us to “choose” a day of the week to set aside as Sabbath. I meant that if someone has to work on every Sunday or for some other reason they cannot be in church on Sunday – then choosing a day they can set aside to honor the Sabbath is better than nothing.

        Like you, I believe Sunday is the first day of the week and I believe that is the day we should set aside to honor the Sabbath. Sunday has always been a family day for me and what better day to be Sabbath than a family day.

  3. marcusmaxis Says:

    COLOSSIANS 2:16 ?

    Whenever the question of the Sabbath is discussed, those who
    do not keep it holy will inevitably appeal to Colossians 2:16 as
    their authority for disobeying the fourth commandment of God.
    What exactly did Paul mean when he wrote:

    “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or
    in respect of a holyday, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath
    days:” Colossians 2:16

    Yes, when Paul said “Sabbath” he meant the seventh day
    Sabbath – but that does not mean that Paul was canceling the
    requirement for obedience to a commandment of God. What God
    has commanded only God can set aside. One may search the New
    Testament for a thousand years and he will not find a single
    verse that says God has abrogated one “jot or tittle” of His
    fourth commandment.

    What then was Paul talking about when he said to let no man judge you in respect of Sabbaths? When we look at this verse in its context it soon becomes apparent that Paul was warning about the “Colossian Heresy” which was another gospel based on asceticism and the worship of angels in order to gain assistance from cosmic powers. The essence of this heresy was that Christ alone was not sufficient to deliver us from our slavery to sin.

    As you will see from the following verses, Paul was warning
    against three things that were being added to the gospel.

    1. Traditions of men.

    2. The worship of angels.

    3. Submitting to doctrines of men.

    COL 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and
    vain deceit, after the TRADITION OF MEN of men, after the
    rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

    COL 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink,
    or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the
    Sabbath days:

    COL 2:18 Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary
    humility and WORSHIPING OF ANGELS, intruding into those
    things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,

    COL 2:20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments
    of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye
    subject to ordinances, (Touch not; taste not; handle not;
    Which all are to perish with the using;) AFTER THE
    COMMANDMENTS AND DOCTRINES OF MEN?

    It should be obvious that KEEPING THE SABBATH DAY HOLY
    IS NOT A DOCTRINE OF MEN!

    Paul was not doing away with God’s commandment; he was warning against the false teachers who were saying that if believers did not eat and drink the right food and keep the festivals, new moons and Sabbaths ACCORDING TO CERTAIN HUMAN REGULATIONS they would lose their reward.

    According to verse :23 below, they were teaching that without
    these ascetic regulations one could not overcome the flesh:

    COL 2:23 These [DOCTRINES OF MEN] have indeed an
    appearance of wisdom in promoting rigor of devotion and self-
    abasement and severity to the body, but they are of no value in
    checking the indulgence of the flesh. (RSV)

    One commentator summed up these verses by saying:

    “We conclude then that in verse :16, the warning is not
    against the Sabbath, festivals and dietary laws as such, but
    rather against those who promote these practices as
    indispensable aids to Christian perfection and as needed
    protection from the “elements [evil spiritual forces] of the
    world” thus denying the all sufficiency of Christ.
    (Samuele Bacchiocchi, From Sabbath To Sunday)

    Now really, doesn’t that explanation make a lot more sense than
    the notion that Christians are no longer required to obey the
    fourth commandment? It is a true saying that: “The commandment
    is not nullified by the condemnation of its abuse.”.

    The question we need to ask is this: “Was Paul condemning the Sabbath day, or was he CONDEMNING THE DOCTRINES OF MEN who added ritualistic and ascetic restrictions to faith in Christ?” In order to answer that dispute, one must look at the broad picture. There is not a single verse in the New Testament which states that Paul taught a new doctrine that canceled the Sabbath commandment; nor is there any record of a controversy between the Jews and Gentile Christians over Sabbath-keeping. If Paul had been teaching that the Sabbath commandment had been repealed, it would have split the church wide open and he would have had to answer the objections continuously in his epistles.

    Think about it – if the Jewish believers made such a fuss about circumcision being optional, imagine what they would have said about the Sabbath day being revoked.

    At some point we must use common sense and reason to interpret what has been written. For example, does “Let no man judge you in meat and drink…” mean that Christians can be drunkards? Of course not, because you know that God’s word forbids drunkenness. Well, it also forbids Sabbath-breaking!

    It is only logical to assume that if God was going to cancel one of His commandments, he would make that fact very clear. Surely, if someone said to you: “Let no man judge you in respect of murder or adultery” you would not assume that God had changed His mind about those sins without solid proof. Certainly, you would demand more evidence than one lonely verse in the book of Colossians? Or would you?

    THE CHURCHMEN vs THE SABBATH (Romans 14)

    Many churchmen use Romans 14:5-6 as proof that New Testament
    believers no longer have an obligation to keep the Sabbath day
    holy. So let us examine those two verses, just as a Judge
    would consider evidence in his courtroom, and then decide
    whether or not they testify against Sabbath keeping. Paul
    wrote:

    “One man esteemeth one day above another: another
    esteemeth every day alike. Let very man be fully
    persuaded in his own mind.

    He that regardeth [observeth] the day regardeth it unto
    the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord
    he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the
    Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not,
    to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.”

    Romans 14:5,6

    The Judge would ask: “Where is the Sabbath mentioned in
    those verses?”. The Sabbath is not mentioned there, or in the
    entire book of Romans! No court in the land would allow verses
    that do not mention the Sabbath to be used as evidence in an
    argument against the Sabbath – so why should we?

    You see, Paul could not have been talking about keeping the
    Sabbath day holy because obedience to God’s law is not
    optional. It is ludicrous to suggest that any of the Ten
    Commandments can be disobeyed “unto the Lord”. Think of the
    absurdity of saying “He that stealeth, to the Lord he stealeth;
    and he that stealeth not, to the Lord he stealeth not.”

    What then was Paul talking about? He was talking about fast
    days. The whole 14th chapter of Romans is about food and how
    people’s beliefs about eating should not be interfered with.
    The fast days could be observed according to each believer’s
    conscience. A man could eat -or not eat, keep the day – or not
    keep it. It is as simple as this: Each man could observe FAST
    DAYS, or not observe them, according to his own convictions.

    He that does not eat, regards the day.

    He that eats, does not regard the day.

    The “days” that Paul was referring to were the traditional
    fast days mentioned in Zechariah 7:5-6. The Gentile Christians
    in Rome did not keep them because they had no cultural interest
    in the anniversary fasts that were observed during the Jew’s
    captivity in Babylon. 1

    Even the Jews themselves had different convictions about the
    observance of those days – because those fasts were never
    commanded by God.

    After the captivity (when the temple was being rebuilt) the
    men of Bethel also wondered if they should observe these fasts
    unto the Lord. For example, they asked Zechariah: “Shall I
    weep in the fifth month and abstain, as I have done these many
    years?” (Zech 7:2-3.)

    When you read Zechariah’s answer, notice the striking
    similarity of his words with those of Paul to the church at
    Rome …

    COMPARE Zechariah 7:5-6 “…When ye FASTED and mourned in
    the fifth and seventh month, even those seventy years,

    DID YE AT ALL FAST UNTO ME, even to me [The Lord]?
    And when ye did EAT, and when ye did drink, did ye
    not EAT FOR YOURSELVES, and drink for yourselves?”

    WITH

    Romans 14:6-7 “He that regardeth the [fast] day
    regardeth it UNTO THE LORD; and he that regardeth not
    the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that
    EATETH, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks;
    and he that EATETH NOT, to the Lord he eateth not,
    and giveth God thanks.

    For none of us LIVETH TO HIMSELF, and no man dieth to
    himself.”

    If you were the Judge in the case of the CHURCHMEN VERSUS
    THE SABBATH, would you be willing to say that Paul had cancelled
    one of the commandments of God based on the evidence you find in
    the 14th chapter of Romans?

    In our opinion, the evidence from Romans and Zechariah
    demands a verdict for Sabbath observance. The church must obey
    the Fourth Commandment – that is the only decision that will
    uphold the Law of God.

    NO SABBATH (Col 2:16 & Rom 14:5)

    COLOSSIANS 2:16 ?

    Whenever the question of the Sabbath is discussed, those who
    do not keep it holy will inevitably appeal to Colossians 2:16 as
    their authority for disobeying the fourth commandment of God.
    What exactly did Paul mean when he wrote:

    “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or
    in respect of a holyday, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath
    days:” Colossians 2:16

    Yes, when Paul said “Sabbath” he meant the seventh day
    Sabbath – but that does not mean that Paul was canceling the
    requirement for obedience to a commandment of God. What God
    has commanded only God can set aside. One may search the New
    Testament for a thousand years and he will not find a single
    verse that says God has abrogated one “jot or tittle” of His
    fourth commandment.

    What then was Paul talking about when he said to let no man judge you in respect of Sabbaths? When we look at this verse in its context it soon becomes apparent that Paul was warning about the “Colossian Heresy” which was another gospel based on asceticism and the worship of angels in order to gain assistance from cosmic powers. The essence of this heresy was that Christ alone was not sufficient to deliver us from our slavery to sin.

    As you will see from the following verses, Paul was warning
    against three things that were being added to the gospel.

    1. Traditions of men.

    2. The worship of angels.

    3. Submitting to doctrines of men.

    COL 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and
    vain deceit, after the TRADITION OF MEN of men, after the
    rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

    COL 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink,
    or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the
    Sabbath days:

    COL 2:18 Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary
    humility and WORSHIPING OF ANGELS, intruding into those
    things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,

    COL 2:20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments
    of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye
    subject to ordinances, (Touch not; taste not; handle not;
    Which all are to perish with the using;) AFTER THE
    COMMANDMENTS AND DOCTRINES OF MEN?

    It should be obvious that KEEPING THE SABBATH DAY HOLY
    IS NOT A DOCTRINE OF MEN!

    Paul was not doing away with God’s commandment; he was warning against the false teachers who were saying that if believers did not eat and drink the right food and keep the festivals, new moons and Sabbaths ACCORDING TO CERTAIN HUMAN REGULATIONS they would lose their reward.

    According to verse :23 below, they were teaching that without
    these ascetic regulations one could not overcome the flesh:

    COL 2:23 These [DOCTRINES OF MEN] have indeed an
    appearance of wisdom in promoting rigor of devotion and self-
    abasement and severity to the body, but they are of no value in
    checking the indulgence of the flesh. (RSV)

    One commentator summed up these verses by saying:

    “We conclude then that in verse :16, the warning is not
    against the Sabbath, festivals and dietary laws as such, but
    rather against those who promote these practices as
    indispensable aids to Christian perfection and as needed
    protection from the “elements [evil spiritual forces] of the
    world” thus denying the all sufficiency of Christ.
    (Samuele Bacchiocchi, From Sabbath To Sunday)

    Now really, doesn’t that explanation make a lot more sense than
    the notion that Christians are no longer required to obey the
    fourth commandment? It is a true saying that: “The commandment
    is not nullified by the condemnation of its abuse.”.

    The question we need to ask is this: “Was Paul condemning the Sabbath day, or was he CONDEMNING THE DOCTRINES OF MEN who added ritualistic and ascetic restrictions to faith in Christ?” In order to answer that dispute, one must look at the broad picture. There is not a single verse in the New Testament which states that Paul taught a new doctrine that canceled the Sabbath commandment; nor is there any record of a controversy between the Jews and Gentile Christians over Sabbath-keeping. If Paul had been teaching that the Sabbath commandment had been repealed, it would have split the church wide open and he would have had to answer the objections continuously in his epistles.

    Think about it – if the Jewish believers made such a fuss about circumcision being optional, imagine what they would have said about the Sabbath day being revoked.

    At some point we must use common sense and reason to interpret what has been written. For example, does “Let no man judge you in meat and drink…” mean that Christians can be drunkards? Of course not, because you know that God’s word forbids drunkenness. Well, it also forbids Sabbath-breaking!

    It is only logical to assume that if God was going to cancel one of His commandments, he would make that fact very clear. Surely, if someone said to you: “Let no man judge you in respect of murder or adultery” you would not assume that God had changed His mind about those sins without solid proof. Certainly, you would demand more evidence than one lonely verse in the book of Colossians? Or would you?

    THE CHURCHMEN vs THE SABBATH (Romans 14)

    Many churchmen use Romans 14:5-6 as proof that New Testament
    believers no longer have an obligation to keep the Sabbath day
    holy. So let us examine those two verses, just as a Judge
    would consider evidence in his courtroom, and then decide
    whether or not they testify against Sabbath keeping. Paul
    wrote:

    “One man esteemeth one day above another: another
    esteemeth every day alike. Let very man be fully
    persuaded in his own mind.

    He that regardeth [observeth] the day regardeth it unto
    the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord
    he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the
    Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not,
    to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.”

    Romans 14:5,6

    The Judge would ask: “Where is the Sabbath mentioned in
    those verses?”. The Sabbath is not mentioned there, or in the
    entire book of Romans! No court in the land would allow verses
    that do not mention the Sabbath to be used as evidence in an
    argument against the Sabbath – so why should we?

    You see, Paul could not have been talking about keeping the
    Sabbath day holy because obedience to God’s law is not
    optional. It is ludicrous to suggest that any of the Ten
    Commandments can be disobeyed “unto the Lord”. Think of the
    absurdity of saying “He that stealeth, to the Lord he stealeth;
    and he that stealeth not, to the Lord he stealeth not.”

    What then was Paul talking about? He was talking about fast
    days. The whole 14th chapter of Romans is about food and how
    people’s beliefs about eating should not be interfered with.
    The fast days could be observed according to each believer’s
    conscience. A man could eat -or not eat, keep the day – or not
    keep it. It is as simple as this: Each man could observe FAST
    DAYS, or not observe them, according to his own convictions.

    He that does not eat, regards the day.

    He that eats, does not regard the day.

    The “days” that Paul was referring to were the traditional
    fast days mentioned in Zechariah 7:5-6. The Gentile Christians
    in Rome did not keep them because they had no cultural interest
    in the anniversary fasts that were observed during the Jew’s
    captivity in Babylon. 1

    Even the Jews themselves had different convictions about the
    observance of those days – because those fasts were never
    commanded by God.

    After the captivity (when the temple was being rebuilt) the
    men of Bethel also wondered if they should observe these fasts
    unto the Lord. For example, they asked Zechariah: “Shall I
    weep in the fifth month and abstain, as I have done these many
    years?” (Zech 7:2-3.)

    When you read Zechariah’s answer, notice the striking
    similarity of his words with those of Paul to the church at
    Rome …

    COMPARE Zechariah 7:5-6 “…When ye FASTED and mourned in
    the fifth and seventh month, even those seventy years,

    DID YE AT ALL FAST UNTO ME, even to me [The Lord]?
    And when ye did EAT, and when ye did drink, did ye
    not EAT FOR YOURSELVES, and drink for yourselves?”

    WITH

    Romans 14:6-7 “He that regardeth the [fast] day
    regardeth it UNTO THE LORD; and he that regardeth not
    the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that
    EATETH, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks;
    and he that EATETH NOT, to the Lord he eateth not,
    and giveth God thanks.

    For none of us LIVETH TO HIMSELF, and no man dieth to
    himself.”

    If you were the Judge in the case of the CHURCHMEN VERSUS
    THE SABBATH, would you be willing to say that Paul had cancelled
    one of the commandments of God based on the evidence you find in
    the 14th chapter of Romans?

    In our opinion, the evidence from Romans and Zechariah
    demands a verdict for Sabbath observance. The church must obey
    the Fourth Commandment – that is the only decision that will
    uphold the Law of God.

    CASE CLOSED!

    • Mark Says:

      Thanks for your comment. You, no doubt, noticed that I didn’t use the Romans verse and only in a small way referred to the Colossians verse. Thus most of this misses the mark. I think you’re argument would be stronger if you used Jesus’ words in Mt 5 and at least attempted to grapple with Paul telling his readers they are free from the law.

      Nowhere in the Bible do we find a civil, ceremonial, and moral distinction. Thus you can’t get rid of one part (the ceremonial) and keep another (the moral). So if you want to hang onto the Sabbath you also get circumcision and animal sacrifices.

      Isn’t it cleaner exegetically and more Jesus-glorifying to say that we are now free from the law and belong to him? Believers are now part of the New Covenant with a new sign and a new day. Gal 4:9-11 summarizes my response: “But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn back again to the weak and worthless elementary principles of the world, whose slaves you want to be once more? You observe days and months and seasons and years! I am afraid I may have labored over you in vain.” This says it all to me.

  4. marcusmaxis Says:

    Galations 4:8 Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods.

    Galations 4:9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?

    Galations 4:10 Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.

    Your translation of those scriptures is wrong. Check the Wescott & Hort Greek and you can see the proper translation from Greek above. These scriptures are talking about Idols. How you relate this scripture to the Sabbath is beyond me. No relation at all. Now…..I want you to think about something.

    Isaiah 66:22 For as the new heavens and the new earth,(this is talking about the start of the Mellineal reign of Christ) which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain.
    Isaiah 66:23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.
    Isaiah 66:24 And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcasses of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.

    Now… if the Sabbath is in effect in the 1000 year reign of Christ why would it not be in effect today. Do you really think there is an intermediary period where the Sabbath is not in effect? Sorry…that is just not true and if you try to argue this point it is obvious you yourself choose to ignore it and choose to follow the doctrines of men instead of God. For me, I choose God.

    So if your hanging your belief on Galations…….very bad! And not true.

    By the way I am not SDA. I really don’t like there doctrines of what they teach. They have the Sabbath correct but they have a lot of other doctrines wrong.

  5. marcusmaxis Says:

    sorry for the double post above. you can edit it and delete the copy i posted in my original response.

    • Mark Lugg Says:

      I completely understand those who believe the Sabbath is still in force. My main complaint is with the SDA who make Sunday worship the mark of the beast.

      I don’t worship on Sunday because of the Galatians passage. I worship on Sunday because we are released from the law as the arbiter of our behavior (Ro 7:6, 6:14, Ga 3:23-25). Like I said, the Bible doesn’t divide the law into three components so if we are stuck with the Sabbath we have to keep the whole thing. Second, while all the other commandments are repeated in the NT, the command to keep the Sabbath isn’t, Third, the pattern of the post-resurrection church. Finally, because we celebrate Christ’s rest in the New Creation instead of the Sabbath of the original creation.

      I don’t have any problem with your translation of Galatians passage. Actually, I don’t see much of a difference. Where we differ is on the interpretation. In Galatians 4:1-7 Paul is saying that we are no longer under guardian but rather we have been adopted as sons. The guardian believers are no longer under is the law (4:5). In my view, in 8-11 Paul is writing about the same thing. The “weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage” listed in V10 as “days, and months, and times, and years” is a reference to law. Humans are hardwired to keep the law; the law is about the “elementary principles of this world,” v3. The world is about law-keeping because the work of the law is on our hearts (Ro 2:15). They turned from idols but have made Christianity just like idol worship by stressing days, months, times, and years, i.e. works. In verses 12-20, Paul is essentially asking his readers what happened. He is perplexed. In v21 he is right back to the same issue, “Tell me, you who desire to be under the law …” He’s dealing with the law before the 4:8-11 passage, he’s dealing with the law after the 4:8-11 passage. It just makes sense to me that he’s talking about the law in the section in between. More importantly, this is what the book of Galatians is about.

      The Isa 66 passage is more difficult. In my view it isn’t about the millennial reign of Christ. It is about the new heaven and new earth. This is about the eternal state or heaven. This is a time when there will be no more sin and death. Yet, in the Isa 65 text about the same thing (new heavens and earth, 17) people will live to be very old yet they still die, 20. In heaven people obviously won’t die. So, what is going on? Isaiah is explaining the glory of the New Covenant in Old Covenant language. The blessings throughout the passage speak of the blessings of the NC in OC language. The NC is a better covenant. All this to say, I think this is what is going on in the Isa 66 passage. Just like there won’t be death in heaven so there probably won’t be a Sabbath in heaven. Heaven is THE Sabbath, He 4. His point isn’t about the Sabbath but that all flesh shall come to worship before me (again this sounds more like heaven than the Millennium since most believe there will be a rebellion of sorts).

      All I’m saying is that Jesus changes everything. We now keep the law of Christ (1Co 9:21, Ga 6:2). The sign of the covenant has changed (baptism) and so has the day we worship. I want to be as Christocentric as possible. It is all about him.

  6. marcusmaxis Says:

    Well from your post you are using a lot of your own human reasoning to rationalize not having to keep the seventh day sabbath. The Sabbath was kept in the new testament just as in the old. The first four commandments are non negotiable. Jesus himself said he did not come to destroy the law. The law was not nailed the the cross sin was! Galatians is talking about Circumscision not the Sabbath. To say there is nine commandments and the fourth one is done away at the cross is pure heresey. All 10 are still in effect. Your saying all literal statements in Isaiah have prophetic meanings when they mean just what they say. This is your choice not Gods. You are putting words in his mouth. You are making judgements asserted by your own human reasonings. Things you make up in your own mind and are not said in scripture. I go by his word and his alone. I dont use human reasonings to justify doctrines of men which is what you are doing.

    Matthew 19:16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
    Matthew 19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
    Matthew 19:18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
    Matthew 19:19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. (Uh Oh!!!! Commandments still in effect)

    St. John 15:9 As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love.
    St. John 15:10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love.
    (Jesus kept all his fathers commandments, all 10!!)

    Epistle to Romans 13:8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
    Epistle to Romans 13:9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. (All 10 Commandments still in effect!!!) How plainly does it need to be stated.

    1st Corinthians 7:19 Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.
    ( I mean how much clearer can it get!!) Paul never does away with the 10 commandments.

    Acts 13:42 And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.

    Acts 13:44 And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God. ( Gee I never see this habit spoken against or ever changed. Hmmmmm Hmmmmmm!)

    Acts 17:2 And Paul, as his manner was,(AS HIS MANNER WAS I mean Geeez come on how much TRUTH can you INGNORE!) went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,

    Acts 18:4 And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks. He did it every Sabbath. Paul kept the Sabbath and never changed nor did he ever say he changed it or said it was ok to change. What God institutes only God can change. He NEVER did!!!
    Cant get any plainer.

    1st John 2:3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
    1st John 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
    Do you know whos he is talking about here Mark. YOU!

    1st John 3:22 And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.

    1st John 5:2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.
    1st John 5:3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.
    Uhh Mark that fourth commandment is a little grievous for you isnt it?
    Truth Truth Truth.

    2nd John 1:5 And now I beseech thee, lady, not as though I wrote a new commandment unto thee, but that which we had from the beginning, that we love one another.
    2nd John 1:6 And this is love, that we walk after his commandments. This is the commandment, That, as ye have heard from the beginning, ye should walk in it.

    (Commandment the same today as in the days of old)

    Revelation 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

    Revelation 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

    Revelation 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
    Revelation 22:15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.

    How do you have the right to the tree of life. Says it pretty plainly right there. However the choice is your. Mark you have shown me nothing but human reasoning and the doctrines of your own mind to justify your belief, I have however shown you scripture after scripture of TRUTH which you choose to ignore. you say Christ changed it, he changed the Sabbath to Sunday. Where did Christ change it??? He never did nor any other Apostle.

    Blessed Sunday?????
    __________________________________________________________________________________________
    1. “Sabbath” is by definition Saturday, the Seventh Day.
    2. Neither Father nor Son is ever documented as having rested on Sunday.
    3. Neither Father nor Son is ever documented as having blessed Sunday.
    4. No law was ever given to enforce the keeping of Sunday as “Sabbath.”
    5. The New Testament nowhere forbids work to be done on Sunday; no penalty is provided for Sunday’s “violation”; no blessing is promised for Sunday’s observance; and no regulation is given as to how Sunday ought to be observed.
    6. Sunday is never in scripture called the Christian “Sabbath”; it is never called a rest day; it is never even called the “Lord’s Day.”
    7. Neither God, Jesus the Messiah, nor inspired men ever said one word in favor of Sunday as a sanctified or holy day. No sacred title is applied to it.
    8. The Roman Catholic institution transferred the thinking from Saturday to Sunday. According to a catechism document, this occurred because Christ(They thought) rose from the dead on a Sunday, and the Holy Spirit descended upon the apostles on a Sunday. Why did the Catholic Church feel it could or should make this new law that Sunday is now the Sabbath? Because of the “plenitude of that divine power which Jesus Christ bestowed upon her,” (they say).
    ACTS 5:29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.
    MT 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

    Mark the choice is yours. I have shown you proof after proof, truth after truth, line after line. However it is your choice if you want to live after the vanity of your own mind and follow the doctrines of men.

    • Mark Says:

      Thank you for caring about my theology. I appreciate the time you have taken to help me understand your view. I just don’t see things the way you do. I read what you write and I come away more convinced than ever that the day of celebration is Sunday. Blessings, Mark

  7. marcusmaxis Says:

    Thats it just keep hardening that heart. Defend that theology of men at any cost instead of the truth. The scriptural proof that I have given you is of Gods words not mine. I am not trying to convince you of my truth, its Gods truth, its what he says.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: