According to Pastor Vance Stinson of the Church of God International, the Ten Commandments are a "universal" feature of God's Law - meaning that they apply to everyone. Of course, as part of the Decalogue, that would also include the commandment to "remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy." Is that, however, consistent with what Scripture has to say about the Sabbath? OR Does the Bible reveal that the Sabbath was a "cultic" feature of God's Law - meaning that it applied to a relatively small group of people as a religious practice which set them apart from the religious practices of other peoples?
First, although the book of Genesis informs us that the Sabbath was created at the end of God's six days of work after "he" had finished creating (or recreating, as some would say) the earth and universe. Even so, we do not see the Sabbath mentioned again until God introduced it to the children of Israel after "he" had rescued them from Egyptian slavery.
In the sixteenth chapter of the book of Exodus, we read that "the whole congregation of the people of Israel grumbled against Moses and Aaron in the wilderness" because they were hungry (Exodus 16:1-3). As a consequence, we read that God told Moses: "Behold, I am about to rain bread from heaven for you, and the people shall go out and gather a day's portion every day, that I may test them, whether they will walk in my law or not. On the sixth day, when they prepare what they bring in, it will be twice as much as they gather daily." (Exodus 16:4-5, ESV) A little later, in the same chapter, we read: "On the sixth day they gathered twice as much bread, two omers each. And when all the leaders of the congregation came and told Moses, he said to them, 'This is what the Lord has commanded: ‘Tomorrow is a day of solemn rest, a holy Sabbath to the Lord; bake what you will bake and boil what you will boil, and all that is left over lay aside to be kept till the morning.' So they laid it aside till the morning, as Moses commanded them, and it did not stink, and there were no worms in it. Moses said, 'Eat it today, for today is a Sabbath to the Lord; today you will not find it in the field. Six days you shall gather it, but on the seventh day, which is a Sabbath, there will be none.'" (Exodus 16:22-26, ESV) In this way, God introduced the children of Israel to the Sabbath.
Later, at Mount Sinai, we are informed that God included the observance of this Sabbath in the Ten Commandments which "he" gave to Moses (Exodus 20:8-11). Of course, in so doing, the Sabbath became an integral part of God's covenant with the Children of Israel. Indeed, this was made clear at the conclusion of that account of God's dictation to Moses of the terms of the covenant. We read there: "And the Lord said to Moses, 'You are to speak to the people of Israel and say, ‘Above all you shall keep my Sabbaths, for this is a sign between me and you throughout your generations, that you may know that I, the Lord, sanctify you. You shall keep the Sabbath, because it is holy for you. Everyone who profanes it shall be put to death. Whoever does any work on it, that soul shall be cut off from among his people. Six days shall work be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of solemn rest, holy to the Lord. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day shall be put to death. Therefore the people of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, observing the Sabbath throughout their generations, as a covenant forever. It is a sign forever between me and the people of Israel that in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested and was refreshed.'" (Exodus 31:12-17, ESV)
Thus, we can see that the Sabbath was a special feature of God's covenant with the children of Israel. Certainly, the Gentile nations of the world had no such tradition or practice. Hence, if Mr. Stinson is correct in differentiating between "cultic" and "universal" commandments, then we would have to say that the Sabbath commandment is "cultic"!
There are claims in some cultures--in Ethiopia, for example--that the seventh-day Sabbath was observed centuries before Moses. Of course, there is no way to prove whether there is any validity to such traditions. But if indeed the Sabbath was a creation institution and was originally established for the benefit of humankind--which is what I believe--then it did not function as a sign of the Old Covenant until the Old Covenant was inaugurated. Once the Old Covenant was abolished, the Sabbath AS IT FUNCTIONED IN THE OLD COVENANT (i.e., as a sign of the Covenant) was also abolished. That does not mean it has no function under the New Covenant.
ReplyDeleteAs far as "universal" (moral) versus "cultic" (ceremonial) features are concerned, the view of Catholics and Lutherans (among others) is that the universal feature of the Fourth (Third to Catholics and Lutherans) Commandment is the obligation to set aside time for rest and worship, and the ceremonial feature of the Sabbath is the specific day (the seventh day). It is the ceremonial feature that has changed. Christians, then, do not observe the seventh-day Sabbath, but they do meet Sabbath obligations by resting and worshiping on the Lord's Day (Sunday). That's their view.
Here's the heart of the matter: As some Reformed scholars have pointed out, IF the Ten Commandments are carried forward as a unit of divine law into the New Covenant, and IF the Sabbath was instituted on the seventh day at creation week, then the most consistent course of action for the Christian is to observe the seventh-day Sabbath. This observation was made in light of the fact that Reformed theologians have affirmed both points, yet they attempt to affirm a Sunday Sabbath on biblical authority alone, apart from tradition. That's where the Catholic view is more consistent.
Since I believe the Sabbath is one of two great creation institutions (marriage--one man and one woman--being the other), I believe consistency calls for devoting the seventh day to rest and worship. That does not mean, however, that I do not respect those who hold the other view or that I would ever claim that God does not receive their worship. I understand their position very well, and I believe those who hold it are honest and sincere in what they believe in this regard. It's just that I believe that separating the "ceremonial" aspect of the commandment from the moral (universal) aspect is dividing asunder what God has joined together. In some ways it's like saying that two people of the same sex can fulfill the divinely established purposes of marriage, and that the male-female aspect of marriage pertains only to that "be fruitful and multiply" part, which is not essential in a fully populated (overpopulated?) world. And you already know what I think about that.
Because of the feedback, it is my present intention to address this and related points further this Saturday at Bossier City, La.
VS
Excellent comment Vance. I think you covered all the bases!
ReplyDeleteVance,
ReplyDeleteIf the ceremonial cannot be separated from the moral, then how do you justify not performing the sacrifices and rituals associated with the Holy Days? And, if your answer is that Jesus Christ fulfilled those aspects, aren't you effectively contradicting your assertion about separating the ceremonial from the moral? Also, doesn't that imply that Jesus Christ didn't fulfill ALL aspects of the Law? Moreover, sacrifices and circumcision were also instituted before Sinai, but I don't know of any Christians who are arguing that those elements were carried forward into the New Covenant. In other words, does the existence of the Sabbath prior to its inclusion in God's covenant with Israel really justify its inclusion in the terms of the New Covenant in Christ?
Finally, as the true bread from heaven (John 6:22-65) and the personification of the Sabbath rest (Matthew 11:28, Hebrews 4), are you suggesting that the manna and Sabbath of Exodus 16 didn't point to Jesus of Nazareth? If not, please explain how you believe Christ fulfilled that passage of Torah. As for the reference to same sex marriage, I've written a great deal on that subject. Hence, you already know what I think about that. I hope that your remarks at Bossier City will be posted on CGI's website - I'm looking forward to your explanation about these apparent contradictions in your view of these matters.
In reply to VS...
ReplyDeleteOutside of speculation, why should we think the seventh-day Sabbath was observed by anyone prior to Moses' time? Moses wrote that God finished his work and rested on the seventh day and blessed it. (It makes sense for Moses to write that, since the Sabbath ties in so well with the First Creation. But we all know there was another "In the beginning," with a New Creation.) But there's no record of him declaring it as a commandment until God placed it in the middle of the Big Ten in Moses' time -- just like there is no record of the Feast of Unleavened Bread until Moses' time.
Before we read of specific commandments coming directly from God, we see adultery, polygamy, idolatry, lying, killing, etc., during the evil times before Moses. But not once do we see accounts of pre-Mosaic villains breaking the Sabbath, keeping the "wrong days," or forsaking the holy days (things that are super serious in COG minds). The sons of Cain, and Lamech, and Nimrod, and pharaohs, and the men of Sodom, and all the others -- were these baddies keeping the Sabbath? Why wasn't sabbathbreaking chronicled as part of mankind's early sins?
Israel was severely reprimanded for idolatry and sabbathbreaking, but nothing about sabbathbreaking is mentioned concerning anyone else. That's very odd if the ceremonial seventh-day observance was the fist Commandment explicitly given by God for all of mankind to obey.
The Law is not something neatly divided up into parts, where some of them are "still in effect" while others have been abrogated, and our job is to figure out which ones are which. No, not at all. We are no longer under the Law. It has run its course, and has been fulfilled (not destroyed) by Jesus. The reason Catholics, for example, hold high the Ten Commandments is NOT because they were given through Moses, but because they were and are a great summary of the Law of Christ, Jesus being the New Lawgiver. (I might add it's no surprise that neither the New Lawgiver nor the teachings of his apostles ever commanded Saturdaykeeping.)
We can look to the Law of Moses only while wearing "Jesus glasses." He is the Lord of the Sabbath in the sense of being above it, not being subject to it or having his identity bound by it.
Consider, too, that Jesus was utterly incapable of sinning through murder, adultery, idolatry, coveting, etc. (which is to say, Jesus could not have sinned). During the period of time he appeared physically to his disciples after the Resurrection, nothing would have prevented him from -- if he had so chosen to -- doing some elective home repair work on a hot and sweaty Saturday morning before stopping to watch a ball game. It's not against God's nature to do things on Saturday. And neither do we sin by working on Saturday, and dedicating the "first day of the week" to the risen Lord who showed himself multiple times on the first day.
That felt kind of rambly, but it was my stream of consciousness before getting ready to go to work.
I can see now that I was not sufficient clear. In paragraph four, I put "ceremonial" in quotes because that's the argument others (i.e., "Catholics and Lutherans, among others," referred to in a previous paragraph) make. They say that the moral part of the commandment is universal and has been carried forward into the New Covenant, but the ceremonial part (the specific day--the seventh day) has not. I should have made it clear that I don't think the "seventh day" part of the commandment is ceremonial, just as I don't think the "male and female" part of the marriage institution is a nonobligatory part of marriage. My point is that we cannot separate the holiness of the day from the day itself.
ReplyDeleteVS
For those who may be interested, there is a more extensive commentary thread associated with this post over at the "Banned by HWA" blog.
ReplyDeleteVS,
ReplyDeleteI think I can agree that one cannot separate the holiness of the seventh-day Sabbath from the day itself. But Christians (I can only speak for Catholics) don't pretend to observe the Sabbath day or the holiness that was directly connected to it. We keep the Lord's Day and the holiness connected to it.
While that is admittedly a shift (which is OK, because we're not under the Law of Moses), it is nevertheless a keeping of holy time -- not the holy time of the Sabbath, but the holy time of the Lord's Day.
I guess we could say the Sabbath was not changed or transferred to Sunday, but replaced by Sunday, while maintaining the continuity of a weekly rhythm of sanctified time. This is how we keep, in a manner of speaking, the "Sabbath Commandment."
There is a legitimate difference between "changing" and "replacing." It's like what Jesus himself did. He did not "change" Passover -- he replaced it with something else, but in a similar spirit as Passover: its fulfillment, the superior "Lord's Supper," which, while different, bears a continuity. It fulfilled what the Passover was lacking. The Church observes it in a special way every year on Holy Thursday during the same season as Passover (but also weekly, and even daily).
So Sunday is likewise similar to the Sabbath. It's not the same thing, but it's a natural replacement for it, because it reflects the means by which we have found our rest in Christ. That's why we Catholics say we should keep and teach the Ten Commandments. We keep them in a Jesus way, not in a Moses way.