|
|
|
Christian Evangelism, Healing, and Teaching Resources
|
|
| Home > Various Christian Topics > Covenants, Dispensations, and the Ten Commandments: Part Three | Email this article |
|
Covenants, Dispensations, and the Ten Commandments
Introduction
Are Christians required to obey the Ten Commandments? If so, then are we obligated to observe the Sabbath (the Fourth Commandment)? If we are obligated to observe the Sabbath, then does it need to be on Saturday like in the Old Testament, or is there a "Christian Sabbath" which has been changed to Sunday? After prayerfully studying the different arguments that people have made concerning these issues and comparing them against Scripture, my conclusion is that the Ten Commandments were totally and completely abolished at the cross. Christians are under no obligation to observe the Sabbath in any way, and we are under no obligation to obey any of the Ten Commandments. A Review of the Covenants
In Part One of this article we examined the covenants which God has made with people throughout history. We saw that all of the covenants are unconditional and are still in effect, with the exception of the Edenic Covenant and the Mosaic Covenant (also known as the Old Covenant). We saw that the Edenic Covenant was broken in the Garden of Eden and was replaced with the Adamic Covenant, and we saw that the Old Covenant was broken and was replaced with the New Covenant. Most of us have not been taught much about these covenants, which makes it easy for us to assume that some of the things that we see in the Old Testament period (such as the Ten Commandments) must have been brought forward into the New Testament period. But when we understand about the covenants which God has made with people throughout human history, we can begin to see that if we are not under a particular covenant then we have no obligation to obey that covenant, and therefore we cannot break that covenant through disobedience. For example, Abraham was not under the Old Covenant (because he lived centuries before the Law of Moses was instituted - see Galatians 3:16-17), and therefore there was no way that Abraham could break the Old Covenant. The only people who can break the rules of a covenant are those who are under that covenant. To illustrate this, imagine that my neighbor is married. Malachi 2:14 indicates that marriage is a covenant, so my neighbor is under a marriage covenant with his wife. Notice that if I say, "I'm planning to divorce my neighbor's wife," that statement would make no sense. There is no possible way that I can divorce her or break a marriage covenant with her because I am not under a marriage covenant with her. In the same way, it was not possible for Abraham to break the Old Covenant because he was never under that covenant, and it is not possible for us to break the Old Covenant today because we are not under that covenant (as we will see). Here's another example. I live in Texas, and my parents live in another state. If I break a law while visiting my parents then I have broken their state's law, but I have not broken any Texas laws. While I am in their state I am not under Texas law, so it is not possible for me to break any of the laws of Texas. Similarly, no-one today is under the Old Covenant (because it has been canceled, as we will see), so it is not possible for anyone to break any of the 613 laws of the Old Covenant, which includes the Ten Commandments. The Law of Moses Is Treated As a Single Unit Throughout the Bible
As we saw in Part One, the content of the Old Covenant was the Law of Moses, which contained a total of 613 commandments. Ten of those commandments are known as "the Ten Commandments." Bible teachers often group these 613 commandments into three categories: "moral laws," "ceremonial laws," and "civil laws," although there are disagreements about which laws fall into which categories. Some people believe that the entire Law of Moses has been canceled. But based on the above categories of laws, other people believe that the "ceremonial" and "civil" laws were canceled at the cross, and only the "moral laws" are still in effect for Christians. Some people believe that the Ten Commandments are included in the "moral laws," and therefore Christians are required to obey the Ten Commandments. Furthermore, there are those who believe that Christians are obligated to observe the Sabbath (the Fourth Commandment) on Saturday, just as the Law of Moses commands, while other people believe that the Sabbath has been changed to Sunday. Then there are those who believe that church services should be held on Sunday (which some people refer to as "the Lord's Day"), but they don't believe that Sunday is the "Christian Sabbath." It turns out that all of this confusion is easily cleared up when we obey the apostle Paul's command in 1 Corinthians 4:6: "Do not go beyond what is written" (1 Corinthians 4:6)You see, it might be useful to group the commandments of the Law of Moses into different categories in order to study them, but we should always keep in mind that these categories are not Scriptural. When we pay close attention to the Bible and we "do not go beyond what is written" then we will discover that the Bible never groups the commandments of the Law into separate categories such as ceremonial laws, civil laws, and moral laws. Instead, the entire Law of Moses is consistently treated as a single unit throughout the Bible. For example, James pointed out that if a person disobeyed just one commandment under the Law of Moses then he was guilty of breaking the entire Law of Moses: "If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, "Love your neighbor as yourself [Leviticus 19:18]," you are doing right. But if you show favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers [Leviticus 19:15]. For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it. For he who said, "Do not commit adultery [Exodus 20:14]," also said, "Do not murder [Exodus 20:13]." If you do not commit adultery but do commit murder, you have become a lawbreaker. Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom," (James 2:8-12)In the above passage, James used several examples from the Law of Moses to show that disobeying any part of the Law made a person guilty of breaking all of the Law, which indicates that the Law of Moses was considered to be one single unit. Then James pointed out that Christians are under "the law that gives freedom" (James 2:12, above), which is the Law of Christ (as we will examine in more detail later). The apostle Paul made a similar statement about the Law of Moses when he said that if a man lets himself be circumcised then he is obligated to obey the entire the Law of Moses: "Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law." (Galatians 5:3)This means that if a Jewish man under the Old Covenant was not circumcised then he was guilty of breaking the whole Law of Moses. The point here is that if a person under the Old Covenant broke any of the 613 commandments in the Law of Moses then he was guilty of breaking the entire Law, which indicates that the Law was considered to be a single unit. Here are some examples from most of the books of the Bible to demonstrate this fact: "Then Eleazar the priest said to the soldiers who had gone into battle, "This is the requirement of the law that the LORD gave Moses:"" (Numbers 31:21) Again, the entire Law of Moses is consistently treated as a single entity throughout the Bible. This is an important point, because if the New Testament says that the Law of Moses has been canceled then it means that the entire Law has been canceled, including the Ten Commandments. The Law of Moses Has Been Canceled
The New Testament makes it clear that through Christ the Law of Moses has been abolished and canceled: "Do you not know, brothers--for I am speaking to men who know the law--that the law has authority over a man only as long as he lives? For example, by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law of marriage. ... So, my brothers, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit to God. ... But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code." (Romans 7:1-6)Here are some of the facts which we are given in the above passages:
We have already seen that throughout the Old and New Testaments, the Law of Moses is treated as a single unit. The Bible never groups any of the commandments of the Law of Moses into categories such as "ceremonial laws," "civil laws," or "moral laws," so even though these categories might be useful for studying the Law of Moses, we should always keep in mind that they are man-made categories. The entire Law of Moses (all 613 commandments, which includes the Ten Commandments) is consistently treated as a single entity throughout the Bible, and the above passages tell us that the entire Law was totally and completely canceled at the cross. Therefore, the Ten Commandments have been canceled, and Christians are not bound by them. Remember, the only people who are obligated to obey the commands of a covenant are those who are under that covenant. As Christians, we are under the New Covenant, not the Old Covenant, which means that we are not obligated to obey any of the commands of the Old Covenant. Later we will examine the Law of Christ, which we are obligated to obey. Jesus Did Not Destroy the Law, He Fulfilled It
Even though the above passages make it clear that the entire Law of Moses has been canceled in Christ, people sometimes have trouble with the following passage: "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. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 5:17-19)As Jesus said, He was not destroying or overthrowing the Law of Moses, nor did He teach anyone to ignore or disobey the Law. This is because the Law of Moses was still in effect during Jesus' entire lifetime. For example, notice what Jesus said to a rich man who wanted to inherit eternal life: "As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. "Good teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?" "Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good--except God alone. You know the commandments: 'Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, do not defraud, honor your father and mother.'"" (Mark 10:17-19)Notice that Jesus told this rich man to obey the commandments in the Law of Moses, which demonstrates that the Ten Commandments were still in force at that time (remember, Jesus lived His entire life under the Law of Moses). During His life, Jesus perfectly fulfilled the commandments of the Law, and then He canceled it on the cross: "When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross." (Colossians 2:13-14)In Mark 10:17-19 (above) Jesus had not yet gone to the cross, so the rich man was obligated to obey the Ten Commandments and the rest of the Law of Moses. However, this has no bearing on Christians because Jesus perfectly fulfilled the Law and then He took it away, nailing it to the cross (Colossians 2:13-14, above). Here are some things that various Bible commentaries say about this: "I came not to destroy, but to fulfil (ouk hlqon katalusai alla plhrwsai). The verb "destroy" means to "loosen down" as of a house or tent (2 Corinthians 5:1). Fulfil is to fill full. This Jesus did to the ceremonial law which pointed to him and the moral law he kept. "He came to fill the law, to reveal the full depth of meaning that it was intended to hold" (McNeile)." (Robertson's Word Pictures of the New TestamentAs these Bible commentaries point out, Jesus fulfilled the commandments of the Law of Moses, as well as its design and intent. Since Christians are the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:12-27), we share in the fulfillment of the Law of Moses by being in Christ. Jesus said that He did not come to destroy the Law, and later we will see that the Law of Moses is still good when it is used properly. Earlier we looked at Ephesians 2:14-15, which says that Jesus "has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations." Yet in Matthew 5:17 (above), Jesus said, "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." In our English translations of the Bible, these two verses appear to contradict each other. But when we look at the Greek, we find something interesting: "For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing [katargeo] in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace" (Ephesians 2:14-15)Notice that the English translation uses the word "abolish" in both of the above verses, but we can see that Paul and Jesus actually used different Greek words. Paul used the Greek word katargeo, which means "to render idle," "to render inactive," "to cause to cease," "put an end to," and so on (see Strong's Greek Dictionary, Thayer's Greek Dictionary, Zodhiates' Greek Dictionary, etc.). These meanings can be seen in the majority of the New Testament passages which use the Greek word katargeo: "What if some did not have faith? Will their lack of faith nullify [katargeo] God's faithfulness?" (Romans 3:3)In contrast, Jesus used the Greek word kataluo, which means "to destroy," "demolish," "throw down," "subvert," "overthrow," and so on (see Strong's Greek Dictionary, Thayer's Greek Dictionary, Zodhiates' Greek Dictionary, etc.). These meanings can be seen in the majority of the New Testament passages which use the Greek word kataluo: "Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. Do you see all these things?" he asked. "I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down [kataluo]."" (Matthew 24:1-2)So Jesus said that He was not overthrowing or subverting or destroying the Law of Moses, which is the meaning of the Greek word for "abolish" that Jesus used. In contrast, Paul said that Jesus had put an end to the Law of Moses, rendering it inactive, which is the meaning of the Greek word for "abolish" that Paul used. In addition, the Greek word pleroo in Matthew 5:17 (above) has the basic meaning of "To make full, fill," and in context it can mean "To fulfill, bring to a full end, accomplish, complete. ... By implication, to fill out, complete, make perfect, accomplish an end (Matt. 5:17; Phil. 2:2; 2 Thess. 1:11)." (The Complete Word Study Dictionary of the New Testament, Spiros Zodhiates, p.1176-1177). As this New Testament Greek dictionary points out, the Greek word pleroo in Matthew 5:17 (above) indicates that Jesus fulfilled the Law and the prophecies about His incarnation, bringing those to an end. Here are some more examples in which this Greek word means that something was fulfilled and completed or brought to an end: "But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, "Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins." All this took place to fulfill [pleroo] what the Lord had said through the prophet: "The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel" --which means, "God with us."" (Matthew 1:20-23)So the Greek word pleroo is often used in the sense of bringing something to an end. When Jesus said, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill [pleroo] them" (Matthew 5:17, above), He was saying that He was bringing the Law to an end by perfectly fulfilling it rather than by destroying it. We know this because the New Testament specifically tells us that the Law of Moses came to an end at the cross (as we have seen). Notice that the apostle Paul said that if we try to place ourselves under the works of the Law of Moses, which includes the Ten Commandments, then we are placing ourselves under a curse: "For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them." (Galatians 3:10, KJV)Remember, if we are in Christ then we are under the New Covenant. Notice that the Old Covenant was intended to be a "schoolmaster" (so to speak) until Christ came: "But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster." (Galatians 3:23-25, KJV)In the above passage, the apostle Paul described the Law of Moses as being a "schoolmaster" or a "tutor" for children, and he said that there is no longer a need for such a "tutor" now that Christ has come. Here are some things that Bible commentaries say about this: "the law being called a schoolmaster, shows that the use of it was but temporary, and its duration but for a time; children are not always to be under, nor designed to be always under a schoolmaster, no longer than till they are come to a proper age for greater business and higher exercises of life; so the law was to continue, and did continue, to be of this use and service to the Jewish church during its minority, until Christ came" (Gill's Exposition of the Bible, from http://www.e-sword.net/commentaries.htmlAs these Bible commentaries point out, a tutor is only needed until the child reaches a certain age, and then the tutor is dismissed. The apostle Paul said that the Law of Moses was a "tutor" for the Jews until Christ came (Galatians 3:23-25, above), and he said that since Christ has come, there is no longer a need for such a "tutor." Once again we can see that just as a tutor is dismissed when he is no longer needed, the Law of Moses has been canceled because it is no longer needed after the cross. Therefore we are not under the Law of Moses in any way, which means that we are not obligated to obey any of the Ten Commandments. The Law of Christ
If Christians are not bound by the Ten Commandments, then does this mean that we are free to commit murder or commit adultery or tell lies or steal? No, these things are sins, but it is not because of the Ten Commandments. The Ten Commandments were part of the Law of Moses, but Christians are under the Law of Christ (which is also referred to as "Christ's law," "the law of the Spirit of life," "the new way of the Spirit," "the perfect law that gives freedom," and so on): "Carry each other's burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ." (Galatians 6:2)When we pay close attention to what the Bible says and we "do not go beyond what is written" (1 Corinthians 4:6), we can see that the Old Covenant (which included the Ten Commandments) has been canceled, and that we are under the New Covenant. Christians are not under the Law of Moses, we are under the Law of Christ. If we steal something (for example) then we have broken the Law of Christ, but we have not broken the Ten Commandments, and this is where people have gotten confused. Since the Law of Christ and the Law of Moses contain a number of similar commands, people have erroneously assumed that some parts of the Law of Moses must still be in force for Christians. But the fact that certain rules in the Old Covenant are similar to certain rules in the New Covenant does not mean that the two covenants have somehow been "combined." Instead, the Old Covenant was canceled. As we can see, the New Covenant mentions some of the same sins which are found in the Ten Commandments under the Old Covenant: "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters [compare this with the Second Commandment], nor adulterers [compare this with the Seventh Commandment], nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves [compare this with the Eighth Commandment], nor covetous [compare this with the Tenth Commandment], nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God." (1 Corinthians 6:9-10, KJV)Again, the New Testament makes references to the same types of sins which are found in the Ten Commandments, but this does not mean that the Ten Commandments are still in force under the New Covenant. If we commit any of the above sins then we have broken the New Testament Law of Christ, but we have not broken the Ten Commandments because the Ten Commandments were canceled at the cross along with the rest of the Law of Moses. Many Christians assume that "the moral laws" (including the Ten Commandments) were brought over from the Old Covenant into the New Covenant, but that is a false assumption. The Bible never refers to such a thing as "the moral laws," so it is unScriptural to say that "the moral laws" were brought over from the Old Covenant into the New Covenant. As we have seen, no commands were "carried over" from the Old Covenant into the New Covenant period. To summarize, Christians are under the Law of Christ, not the Law of Moses. The Sabbath
The passages above (1 Corinthians 6:9-10, 8:4-6, Ephesians 6:1-3, 1 Timothy 1:9-11, 20, and 1 John 3:15) demonstrate that nine of the Ten Commandments have counterparts in the New Testament, but notice that the Fourth Commandment (observing the Sabbath) is missing. There is no New Testament counterpart for the Fourth Commandment. The Sabbath has been completely canceled in Christ, and Christians are not required to observe it. However, some people are not convinced that the Sabbath observance has been canceled, and other people believe that Sunday is now the "Christian Sabbath," so let's take a look to see if the Bible supports these views. First, notice that the apostle Paul explicitly tells us that we are not required to observe the Sabbath: "One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord." (Romans 14:5-6)When Paul referred to one day being considered as more sacred than another, the first-century Jews would have easily understood that he was referring to the Sabbath. Paul's point was that the Sabbath can be considered as a special day, but it does not need to be regarded as sacred or special. Observing the Sabbath is not a requirement under the New Covenant (which further confirms that the Ten Commandments have been abolished). Here's another example: "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." (Colossians 2:16-17)Whenever we see the word "therefore" in Scripture, we should try to find out what it's there for. This passage follows Paul's discussion in which he points out that the Law of Moses has been canceled and has been nailed to the cross (Colossians 2:14-15). Therefore, Paul says, we should not let anyone judge us in regard to keeping the Sabbath because the Sabbath was a shadow of things to come. Observing the Sabbath is not a requirement under the New Covenant (which further confirms that the Ten Commandments have been abolished). Here's another example: "But now that you know God--or rather are known by God-- how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you." (Galatians 4:9-11)In the book of Galatians, the apostle Paul was trying to counteract the teachings of a certain group of Jews (often called the "Judaizers") who were trying to force Gentile Christians to submit themselves to the Law of Moses. The Law of Moses is the context here, and the "special days and months and seasons and years" must be interpreted in light of the context. They are all related to the Law of Moses. The "years" are the sabbath years and the Year of Jubilee (see Leviticus 25:2-13). The "seasons" refer to the seasonal religious festivals (see Colossians 2:16-17 above, and also see the quote below). The "months" are the New Moon celebrations (see Colossians 2:16-17 above) which occurred monthly. The "special days" include the Sabbath days. For example, here is what a prominent Bible commentary says about this passage: "Under the influence of the Judaizers the Galatians had at least begun to observe the Mosaic calendar. They kept special days (weekly sabbaths), and months (new moons), and seasons (seasonal festivals such as Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles), and years (sabbatical and jubilee years)." (The Bible Knowledge Commentary, Walvoord and Zuck, Dallas Theological Seminary, p.602)Paul was asking the Gentile Christians in Galatia why they were turning "backwards" to the weak and miserable principles of the Law of Moses. He feared that he had wasted his efforts on them, partly because they were observing "special days" (the weekly Sabbaths). His point was that the Sabbath and all of the other commandments of the Law of Moses have now been canceled, so why would anyone want to become enslaved to them? Therefore, once again we can see that observing the Sabbath is not a requirement under the New Covenant (which further confirms that the Ten Commandments have been abolished). What are the Scriptural requirements for observing the Sabbath?
Since we're investigating the arguments that people sometimes make concerning the Sabbath, let's take a look at some of the Scriptural requirements for observing the Sabbath: "Six days you shall labor, but on the seventh day you shall rest; even during the plowing season and harvest you must rest." (Exodus 34:21)These are some of the Scriptural requirements which relate to the Sabbath. Meaning no offense, but if we believe that Christians must observe the Sabbath, do we really rest on the Sabbath? Do we really refuse to do any kind of work on the Sabbath? Do we really refuse to light a fire in our homes on the Sabbath? Do we really refuse to carry a load on the Sabbath? Do we really keep the Sabbath day holy? Do we really refuse to buy or sell any food on the Sabbath? Do we really put to death anyone who does any kind of work on the Sabbath? These are some of the Sabbath requirements in the passages above. Notice that when we try to make the Sabbath a requirement for Christians, we inevitably make adjustments to the Old Testament Sabbath commands. But if we make adjustments to the Scriptural requirements for the Sabbath, then we are no longer observing the Sabbath of the Bible. Instead, we are observing a false, man-made Sabbath which we have invented. When we do this, it shows that deep down we do not really believe that the Biblical Sabbath is a requirement for Christians after all. But isn't the Sabbath a "Creation Ordinance"?
One way that people try to justify the Sabbath is by calling it a "Creation Ordinance." The argument is that the Sabbath has existed since Creation, and therefore it is a commandment for everybody throughout all time. They base this view on Genesis 2:2-3: "By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done." (Genesis 2:2-3)Now, for the sake of discussion let's pretend that the Sabbath is a "Creation Ordinance" (in other words, it was established at the time of Creation). Does this automatically mean that observing the Sabbath is a requirement for everybody throughout all time? We can easily answer this question by looking at another "Creation Ordinance" in Genesis: "Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. The man said, "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called 'woman,' for she was taken out of man." For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh." (Genesis 2:22-24)Marriage is considered to be a "Creation Ordinance," and Jesus confirmed this for us: ""Haven't you read," he [Jesus] replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female' [Genesis 1:27], and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh' [Genesis 2:24]?"" (Matthew 19:4-5)Notice that Jesus quoted from Genesis 1:27 and 2:24, giving the literal account of Creation direct approval from God. Jesus confirmed for us that marriage is a "Creation Ordinance," yet the New Testament says that marriage is not a requirement for Christians: "Now for the matters you wrote about: It is good for a man not to marry." (1 Corinthians 7:1)Notice that the apostle Paul said that it is acceptable for people to remain unmarried. So even though marriage is a "Creation Ordinance," this does not make it binding on everyone throughout all time. In the same way, if the Sabbath were a "Creation Ordinance," this would not automatically make it binding on everyone throughout all time. In reality, though, the Sabbath is not a "Creation Ordinance" at all. Let's take another look at that passage in Genesis: "By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done." (Genesis 2:2-3)The apostle Paul said "do not go beyond what is written" (1 Corinthians 4:6), so notice carefully what Genesis 2:2-3 (above) says and what it does not say. This passage simply describes what God did on the seventh day, it does not contain any commands for people to observe the Sabbath. The word "Sabbath" is not even used in this passage, and in fact the Hebrew word for "Sabbath" does not appear in the Bible until Exodus 16:23. Prior to Exodus 16:23 there are no commands concerning the Sabbath, nor is there any record of anyone observing the Sabbath before Exodus 16:30. The Sabbath was not instituted until Exodus 16:23. It is not a "Creation Ordinance." But what about Hebrews 4:3-9, which talks about Creation and then refers to a "Sabbath-rest"? Here is that passage: "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 work has been finished since the creation of the world. For somewhere he has spoken about the seventh day in these words: "And on the seventh day God rested from all his work." And again in the passage above he says, "They shall never enter my rest." It still remains that some will enter that rest, and those who formerly had the gospel preached to them did not go in, because of their disobedience. Therefore God again set a certain day, calling it Today, when a long time later he spoke through David, as was said before: "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts." For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken later about another day. There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God;" (Hebrews 4:3-9)This passage describes a "Sabbath-rest" for the people of God, which is compared to the fact that God rested on the seventh day after He had finished His acts of Creation. The Greek word that is used in this passage is sabbatismos, which means: "a 'sabbatism', i.e. (fig.) the repose of Christianity (as a type of heaven):--rest" (Strong's Greek Dictionary)Here's how another Greek dictionary describes this word: "In Heb. 4:9 we have the word sabbatismos, referring to the rest which is going to be enjoyed by the people of God when their earthly work is finished." (The Complete Word Study Dictionary of the New Testament, Spiros Zodhiates, p.1268)This is not the Greek word for the weekly Sabbath observance, and in fact the Greek word for "Sabbath" is not used in Hebrews 4:3-9 (above) at all. This passage does not refer to the Sabbath, it refers to the "Sabbath-rest" for the people of God (as a "type" of heaven when our earthly work is finished, according to the Greek dictionaries quoted above). Also, notice that Hebrews 4:3-9 (above) does not contain any commands for Christians to observe the Sabbath. The weekly Sabbath has no bearing on this passage at all. To summarize, the Sabbath is not a "Creation Ordinance." But wasn't the Sabbath meant to last forever?
Another argument that people sometimes make is that the Sabbath was a "lasting" covenant "for the generations to come." The argument is that since the Sabbath was intended to last forever, then it could not have been abolished at the cross: "Then the LORD said to Moses, "Say to the Israelites, 'You must observe my Sabbaths. This will be a sign between me and you for the generations to come [dowr], so you may know that I am the LORD, who makes you holy. ... The Israelites are to observe the Sabbath, celebrating it for the generations to come [dowr] as a lasting [owlam] covenant. It will be a sign between me and the Israelites forever [owlam], for in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day he abstained from work and rested.'"" (Exodus 31:12-17)God said that the Sabbath was a "lasting covenant" which was a sign "forever" and which was to continue "for the generations to come." The words "lasting" and "forever" come from the Hebrew word owlam (see Strong's, for example), and the phrase "for the generations to come" comes from the Hebrew word dowr (according to Strong's). But do these Hebrew words really mean that the Sabbath will never end? Here's an example of how one of these Hebrew words is used elsewhere in Scripture: "then his master must take him before the judges. He shall take him to the door or the doorpost and pierce his ear with an awl. Then he will be his servant for life [owlam]." (Exodus 21:6)Other versions of the Bible translate owlam as "forever" or "permanently" in this verse (see the ASV, KJV, NASB, NKJV, NLT, RSV, or TLB, for example). But we can see that owlam does not literally mean "forever" here, it simply means "for the rest of his life." Here's another example: "then take an awl and push it through his ear lobe into the door, and he will become your servant for life [owlam]." (Deuteronomy 15:17)Other versions of the Bible translate owlam as "forever" or "always" in this verse (see the AMP, ASV, KJV, NASB, NKJV, or TLB, for example). But once again we can see that owlam does not literally mean "forever" here, it simply means "for the rest of his life." Here's another example: "Hannah did not go. She said to her husband, "After the boy is weaned, I will take him and present him before the LORD, and he will live there always [owlam]."" (1 Samuel 1:22)Other versions of the Bible translate owlam as "forever" or "permanently" in this verse (see the ASV, KJV, NASB, NKJV, NLT, or RSV, for example). But once again we can see that owlam does not literally mean "forever" here, it simply means "for the rest of his life." Here's another example: "An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to their tenth generation shall they not enter into the congregation of the LORD for ever [owlam]" (Deuteronomy 23:3, KJV)We can see that owlam does not literally mean "forever" here because it is limited to ten generations. Here are several more examples: "Then dress Aaron in the sacred garments, anoint him and consecrate him so he may serve me as priest. Bring his sons and dress them in tunics. Anoint them just as you anointed their father, so they may serve me as priests. Their anointing will be to a priesthood that will continue for all generations to come [dowr]." (Exodus 40:13-15)These passages describe some of the commands in the so-called "ceremonial laws," which Christian scholars agree were abolished at the cross. The Old Covenant priesthood, the showbread, the animal sacrifices, and so on were all canceled at the cross, yet in the above passages these things are called "lasting" (owlam) ordinances "for the generations to come" (dowr)! The Hebrew words which are used in the above passages are the very same Hebrew words which are used when the Sabbath is called a "lasting" (owlam) ordinance "for the generations to come" (dowr). We can see that the Hebrew words owlam and dowr do not always mean "eternal," and therefore we cannot dogmatically claim that the Sabbath is an eternal command. The Sabbath was abolished along with the rest of the Ten Commandments when Christ "nailed them to the cross" (Colossians 2:13-14). But didn't Jesus and the apostles observe the Sabbath?
People sometimes point out that Jesus is our perfect role model, and that Jesus observed the Sabbath. But what they are forgetting is that Jesus lived His entire life under the Old Testament Law of Moses. Remember, the Law of Moses was not abolished until Jesus died. But didn't the apostles observe the Sabbath after the cross? To answer this question, let's take a look at every New Testament passage which refers to the apostles and the Sabbath after Jesus' death: "From Perga they went on to Pisidian Antioch. On the Sabbath they entered the synagogue and sat down. After the reading from the Law and the Prophets, the synagogue rulers sent word to them, saying, "Brothers, if you have a message of encouragement for the people, please speak." Standing up, Paul motioned with his hand and said: "Men of Israel and you Gentiles who worship God, listen to me! ... Before the coming of Jesus, John preached repentance and baptism to all the people of Israel."" (Acts 13:14-16, 24)These are all of the passages in the New Testament which refer to the apostles and the Sabbath after Jesus' death. Notice that nowhere do these passages say that keeping the Sabbath is a requirement for Christians, and nowhere do these passages say that the apostles were observing the Sabbath. In every case, the apostles were doing evangelism in the Synagogues. These passages tell us that non-Christians were observing the Sabbath, but these passages do not contain any commands for Christians to observe the Sabbath. "The Lord's Day"
But what about "the Lord's Day"? Doesn't this Biblical phrase mean that Sunday is now the "Christian Sabbath"? Not necessarily. The Bible says that Christians must not neglect meeting together (see Hebrews 10:25), but we are never commanded to meet on a specific day. The New Testament never says that the Sabbath was changed to Sunday, nor does the New Testament ever command Christians to meet on Sunday. Sunday is always referred to as "the first day of the week" in the New Testament (see Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:2, 9, Luke 24:1, John 20:1, and Acts 20:7). There is not a single place in the entire New Testament where Sunday is referred to as "the Lord's Day." In fact, that phrase only appears one time in the entire Bible: "On the Lord's Day I was in the Spirit, and I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet" (Revelation 1:10)Revelation 1:10 (above) is the only place where "the Lord's Day" appears in the entire Bible, and notice that it is not associated with any particular day of the week. Some people believe that if Jesus was resurrected on a Sunday then Sunday must be "the Lord's Day," but the Bible does not actually say such a thing. It is interesting that throughout the New Testament, the phrase "the day of the Lord" most often refers to the future seven-year Tribulation period, the time when God will pour out His wrath on the earth. For example, here is what a prominent Bible commentary says about 1 Thessalonians 5:2, 2 Thessalonians 2:2, and 2 Peter 3:10: "the day of the Lord will include both judgment and blessing. That day begins immediately after the Rapture of the church and ends with the conclusion of the Millennium. This day is a major theme of prophecy with its fullest exposition in Revelation 6-19." (The Bible Knowledge Commentary, Walvoord and Zuck, Dallas Theological Seminary, p.705, emphasis added)So in the New Testament, "the day of the Lord" refers to a future period of time when God will pour out His wrath on the earth, as in the following passages: "The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and glorious day of the Lord." (Acts 2:20)The apostle John witnessed many of the things which will happen during "the day of the Lord," and he wrote them down in the book of Revelation. Consider the following passages in Revelation: "At once I was in the Spirit, and there before me was a throne in heaven with someone sitting on it." (Revelation 4:2)The above passages tell us that the apostle John was "in the Spirit" while he witnessed "the Day of the Lord." With that in mind, let's look again at Revelation 1:10: "On the Lord's Day I was in the Spirit, and I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet" (Revelation 1:10)Concerning "the Day of the Lord," the apostle John repeatedly said that he was "in the Spirit" as he witnessed that day. Notice that "the Day of the Lord" and "the Lord's Day" are two ways of saying the same thing (for example, "the car of John" and "John's car" are two ways of saying the same thing). This might mean that "the Lord's day" does not refer to Sunday but rather it refers to the time of the seven-year Tribulation ("the Day of the Lord"). For further evidence of this, watch how Jesus described the Second Coming: "For the Son of Man in his day will be like the lightning, which flashes and lights up the sky from one end to the other." (Luke 17:24)Jesus said, "the Son of Man in His day," which tells us that the time period of the Second Coming is "His day." In other words, it is "the Lord's day." So here we have further evidence that "the Lord's Day" might not be a reference to Sunday, but rather it is possibly a reference to "the Day of the Lord." This interpretation of "the Lord's day" has the most Scriptural support to back it up. According to some Bible scholars, there may be evidence that some of the early Church fathers used the phrase, "the Lord's Day," to refer to Sunday. But even if that was their view, we can't know for sure if the apostle John was referring to Sunday in Revelation 1:10. When John said, "On the Lord's Day I was in the Spirit," he might have meant, "On Sunday I was in the Spirit," but we can't prove this from Scripture. The simple fact is that the phrase, "the Lord's Day," only appears in one verse in the entire Bible (Revelation 1:10), and the Bible does not tell us what is really meant by that phrase. Therefore, when we dogmatically claim that "the Lord's Day" must be Sunday then we are "going beyond what is written" (1 Corinthians 4:6), and we are reading into this verse something which isn't actually there. In fact, even if we say that Sunday is "the Lord's Day" (based on Revelation 1:10), notice that there is no command for Christians to observe the Sabbath on "the Lord's Day": "On the Lord's Day I was in the Spirit, and I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet which said: "Write on a scroll what you see and send it to the seven churches: to Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea." I turned around to see the voice that was speaking to me. And when I turned I saw seven golden lampstands, and among the lampstands was someone "like a son of man," dressed in a robe reaching down to his feet and with a golden sash around his chest." (Revelation 1:10-13)So whether or not we believe that Sunday is "the Lord's Day," we are not commanded to observe the Sabbath or attend church on that day. Christians meeting on the first day of the week
Sometimes people point out that the Christians in Troas met on Sunday (the first day of the week) in Acts 20:6-11. In that passage, the English word "week" comes from the Greek word sabbaton, which can mean either "Sabbaths" or "week" depending on the context (see Strong's Greek Dictionary). For instance, when sabbaton is used with a number such as "first" or "twice" then it has the meaning of "week" (see Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament 
or Vincent's Word Studies, Acts 20:7, for example). For all of the New Testament examples of
sabbaton
being used as "week" when accompanied by "first" or "twice," see Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:2, 9, Luke 18:12, 24:1, John 20:1, 19, Acts 20:7, and 1 Corinthians 16:2.
Now let's look closely at Acts 20:6-11 to see what it really says about the Christians in Troas who met on Sunday: "But we sailed from Philippi after the Feast of Unleavened Bread, and five days later joined the others at Troas, where we stayed seven days. On the first day of the week we came together to break bread. Paul spoke to the people and, because he intended to leave the next day, kept on talking until midnight. There were many lamps in the upstairs room where we were meeting. Seated in a window was a young man named Eutychus, who was sinking into a deep sleep as Paul talked on and on. When he was sound asleep, he fell to the ground from the third story and was picked up dead. Paul went down, threw himself on the young man and put his arms around him. "Don't be alarmed," he said. "He's alive!" Then he went upstairs again and broke bread and ate. After talking until daylight, he left." (Acts 20:6-11)Remember, let's be careful that we "do not go beyond what is written" (1 Corinthians 4:6). This passage says that the believers in Troas met on the first day of the week, but it does not treat this meeting as a Sabbath (none of the Sabbath requirements are described here), and it does not say that they were required to meet on the first day of the week, and it does not say that they had the custom of meeting on the first day of the week, and so on. All it says is, "On the first day of the week we came together to break bread." This is the only place in the entire New Testament which describes any Christians meeting on the first day of the week, and people sometimes justify an entire doctrine of a "Christian Sabbath" from this one passage. But the believers in Troas may have met together simply to have one final night of fellowship with the apostle Paul before he left them (as the passage describes). Some people say that "breaking bread" refers to Communion in the above passage (implying that the believers at Troas were having a church service on the first day of the week), but is that really what "breaking bread" means? Apart from Acts 20:6-11 (above), here are all of the New Testament references to "breaking bread": ""We have here only five loaves of bread and two fish," they answered. "Bring them here to me," he said. And he directed the people to sit down on the grass. Taking the five loaves and the two fish and looking up to heaven, he gave thanks and broke the loaves. Then he gave them to the disciples, and the disciples gave them to the people. They all ate and were satisfied, and the disciples picked up twelve basketfuls of broken pieces that were left over. The number of those who ate was about five thousand men, besides women and children." (Matthew 14:17-21)These are all of the New Testament references to "breaking bread," so let's consider how this phrase is used in the above passages. It is used in descriptions of the Last Supper (Matthew 26:26, Mark 14:22, Luke 22:19, 1 Corinthians 11:23-24), it is used in one description of Communion (1 Corinthians 10:16), it is used in descriptions of feeding a meal to the five thousand (Matthew 14:17-21, Mark 6:41-44, Mark 8:19, Luke 9:14-17), it is used in descriptions of feeding a meal to the four thousand (Matthew 15:33-38, Mark 8:6-9, Mark 8:20), it is used when two disciples sat down to eat a meal with Jesus (Luke 24:28-35), it is used for some fellowship meals (Acts 2:41-46), and it is used in a description of food that was eaten before Paul's shipwreck (Acts 27:33-38). Notice that throughout the New Testament, "breaking bread" is most often used for eating a meal (and in a sense, even the Last Supper was a fellowship meal). So when the believers in Troas came together on the first day of the week to "break bread" (Acts 20:6-11, above), this doesn't prove that they were having Communion in a church service. Instead, the passage easily describes a group of believers having a meal together as they spent one final night of fellowship with the apostle Paul before he went off to Assos. So when we look closely at this meeting in Troas to see what this passage really says, we can see that there are no commands here for Christians to meet on Sunday. In fact, this meeting in Troas is never even called a church service. All this passage says is that some believers ate a meal together and that Paul talked for a long time. There is one other passage which people sometimes use to justify their belief that church services must be held on Sunday: "Now about the collection for God's people: Do what I told the Galatian churches to do. On the first day of every week, each one of you should set aside a sum of money in keeping with his income, saving it up, so that when I come no collections will have to be made. Then, when I arrive, I will give letters of introduction to the men you approve and send them with your gift to Jerusalem." (1 Corinthians 16:1-3)Since modern Christian churches usually take up an offering during the church service, some people assume that this passage is describing a church service on the first day of the week. But again, this is "going beyond what is written" (1 Corinthians 4:6). All this passage actually says is that "each one of you should set aside a sum of money" on the first day of the week. So Paul was saying that everyone should individually set aside some money on the first day of the week. There is no reference to church services here, and there is no command to hold church on Sunday or on the "Lord's Day" or on the "Christian Sabbath," etc. Nothing can be proven from this verse other than the fact that Paul wanted people to set aside some money so that he could collect it and take it to Jerusalem. To summarize, when we claim that church must be held on Sunday, or that Sunday is the "Christian Sabbath," or that Sunday is "the Lord's Day," then we are going beyond what is written and we are reading things into these passages that they do not actually say. The Law Is Good
What we have seen so far is that Paul said that the entire Law of Moses, including the Ten Commandments, was canceled at the cross. But then why did Paul make the following statements? "Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law." (Romans 3:31)Paul seems to be contradicting himself. Since Paul said that the Law of Moses has been canceled (as we saw earlier), then why did Paul say in the above passages that the Law is good? To answer this question, let's look at some things that the New Testament says about the purposes for the Law:
|