← Back to sermon library

Continuing our study in the book 
of Exodus, but we've slowed way down in Exodus chapter 20, taking 
each of the commandments one by one. We're on part three of 
the fourth commandment, which is Exodus chapter 20, verses 
8 to 11. But I'll read the section beginning 
in verse one. God spoke all these words saying, 
I am the Lord your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt, 
out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods 
before me. You shall not make for yourself a carved image, 
any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is 
in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. 
You shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord 
your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon 
the children to the third and fourth generations of those who 
hate me, but showing mercy to thousands to those who love me 
and keep my commandments. You shall not take the name of 
the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not hold him guiltless 
who takes his name in vain. Remember the Sabbath day to keep 
it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work. The seventh 
day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do 
no work, you nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male 
servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger 
who is within your gates. For in six days the Lord made 
the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, 
and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the 
Sabbath day and hallowed it. Honor your father and your mother, 
that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your 
God is giving you. You shall not murder, you shall not commit 
adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not bear false witness 
against your neighbor. You shall not covet your neighbor's 
house, you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male 
servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor 
anything that is your neighbor's. Now all the people witnessed 
the thunderings, the lightning flashes, the sound of the trumpet 
and the mountain smoking. And when the people saw it, they 
trembled and stood afar off. Then they said to Moses, you 
speak with us and we will hear, but let not God speak with us 
lest we die. And Moses said to the people, 
do not fear, for God has come to test you, and that his fear 
may be before you, so that you may not sin. So the people stood 
afar off, but Moses drew near the thick darkness where God 
was." Amen. So we looked at an exposition 
of the commandment. If you look specifically at verses 
8 to 11, there is a positive aspect. Remember, the Sabbath 
day to keep it holy. Then there follows a prohibition, 
six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh 
day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do 
no work, you nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male 
servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger 
who is within your gate. So positive aspect, prohibition, 
and then the reason, verse 11, for in six days the Lord made 
the heavens and the earth. the sea and all that is in them, 
and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the 
Sabbath day and hallowed it." Now, when we look at the parallel 
passage in Deuteronomy chapter 5, we see the same emphasis, 
positive aspect, prohibition, and then a reason. Does anybody 
remember what the reason is in the parallel in Deuteronomy chapter 
5? the exodus, so redemption. So 
the twin concepts of creation and redemption are sort of the 
backbone of Sabbath-keeping. So after looking at this commandment 
in particular, we noted the Sabbath in the Old Covenant, because 
if you look at the language in verse 8, it says, remember the 
Sabbath day. In Deuteronomy 5, it says, observe 
the Sabbath day. So both of these emphasize the 
reality that it was already in play, it was already existent. 
In other words, it wasn't given by commandment at Sinai as if 
it had never been given previous to that. So where did we go to 
first see the Sabbath in the Old Covenant? Anybody remember? Genesis chapter 2 verses 1 to 
3, God Sabbathed after he created the world and all things in it, 
by the word of his power in the space of six days everything 
was very good and then God rested. He approved of the work that 
he had conducted. As we learned from John 5 on 
Sunday morning, that doesn't mean the absolute cessation of 
everything in terms of God. God finished creation, God nevertheless 
sustains the creation in His providence, so He is active. 
As Jesus says, My Father has been working until now, so He 
as well works, according to John 5. Now, where did we go after 
creation? Does anybody remember? Cain and Abel, Genesis chapter 
4. So Cain and Abel had the understanding to worship God through sacrifice. They no doubt received this from 
their father Adam. Adam had witnessed God kill animals, 
take the skins off the animals, and cover he and his beloved. 
So in Genesis chapter 3 verse 21 we see that transaction, blood 
atonement, for the forgiveness of sins, Adam then passes that 
down to Cain and Abel, and intriguingly, Cain and Abel go to worship at 
the end of days. It's the end of the days of the 
week, not the end of the days of the world, because that hasn't 
happened yet. So Cain and Abel, taking that 
tradition from their father that he had passed down, not only 
in terms of bringing sacrifice to God in worship, but the specific 
day upon which to worship. Now, moving from there, we saw, 
I think I heard it over here, Exodus chapter 16, the instructions 
given for the collection of manna. Of course, they were told to 
collect double the amount on Friday or on the sixth day so 
that they would have the appropriate measure for Saturday, the Sabbath 
day, and wouldn't have to go out and work. And then, of course, 
you see the giving of the commandments in Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 
5. Again, creation and redemption 
function as the context for Sabbath keeping. And then from there 
we move to the prophets. Anybody remember the specific 
prophets? the law is written on man's heart, 
and thus, while that text doesn't refer to sabotage by name, it's 
implied, or it's thereby been a necessary consequence. Right. 
The law of God is a unit, the law of God is given as a unit, 
and the promise of the new covenant is that the Spirit of God is 
going to write the law of God on the hearts of God's people. 
And so he will internalize that law, such that the law, according 
to John, in 1 John 5, is not grievous, it's not burdensome, 
it's not a hassle for the people of God, but their hearts have 
been changed, their affections have been changed, their desires 
have been changed, and while there is remaining corruption, 
and while there may be the occasional struggle, we delight in the law 
of God in the inward man. So the prophet Jeremiah prophesies 
concerning new covenant reality. And so he speaks concerning the 
law as unit. But prior to Jeremiah, you have 
the prophet Isaiah, and Isaiah, after chapter 53, that last servant 
song of Yahweh that describes the atoning work of the Lord 
Jesus Christ, he shifts his attention to the Messianic kingdom. He 
shifts his attention to new covenant reality, and he is prophesying 
and he is speaking concerning of new covenant blessing. And 
in Isaiah 56, he talks about the eunuch who had been kept 
from the assembly of the Lord being welcomed into the assembly 
of the Lord in the new covenant. We see that come to pass in Acts 
chapter 8, when Philip evangelizes that Ethiopian eunuch. It's a 
wonderful example of a personal victory in terms of soul winning, 
but it's also fulfillment of God's word. In other words, it's 
not the case that those persons will be excluded like they were 
in the old covenant. Now, as well in Isaiah 56, he 
speaks concerning Sabbath, and he speaks concerning the house 
of God being a house of prayer for all the nations. So again, 
He is amplifying the promises given to the patriarchs, the 
promises that move through the prophetic literature, the promises 
that we see in the Psalter, and he shows us that that will come 
in connection with this servant of the Lord that he has introduced 
to us, this servant of the Lord that he spoke of in Isaiah 42, 
Isaiah 49, Isaiah 50, and then Isaiah 52 and 53. So each of 
those servant songs give us a facet concerning the Messiah's work. 
And so on the heels of the last servant song, again, New Covenant 
reality, so we see in the New Covenant, eunuchs brought nigh 
through the blood of Israel's Messiah, and we see Sabbath observance 
in play, along with the church being a house of prayer for all 
nations. And then, of course, in Isaiah the prophet in chapter 
58, God, through the prophet, tells him to upbraid the nation, 
to make her know her sins, and the prophet speaks specifically 
to her religious sins, her sins with reference to fasting and 
Sabbath keeping. It's not wrong to fast, it's 
not wrong to keep the Sabbath. But Israel approached these things 
as external, formalistic ritual, and they had no heart accompaniment. 
And so God uses the prophet to indict them and to call them 
to repentance. And so we can learn a lesson 
with reference to Sabbath keeping from Isaiah chapter 58. We are 
to call it a delight, and we are to see that it's not this 
external thing that is designed to put us into bondage. Jesus 
disavows that notion in Mark's gospel in Mark chapter 2, verse 
27 and 28. He says that man was not made 
for the Sabbath, but rather the Sabbath was made for the man. 
And I think he challenges us there to see or focus our perspective 
on the positive aspect of the commandment. Yeah, there's a 
negative. You can't do your normal work. Well, what a good negative 
that is. And the positive, of course, 
is to set the day apart, sanctify it, keep it holy, find your joy 
and enjoyment in God Most High. So, if we approach the Sabbath 
as a burden, if we approach the Sabbath as a restraint, if we 
approach it as this negative sort of a concept that it's often 
been portrayed by among Sabbatarians, unfortunately, and certainly 
among anti-Sabbatarians, we're doing no one any good. Jesus 
says it was made for the man. It was made for Adam, not not 
Israel as Israel or for the Jew as Jew, but it was made for man. It's a good thing. And then as 
we look at the Sabbath commandment, and I tried to explain this a 
bit last week, I think, there's both moral and ceremonial or 
moral and positive aspects to the fourth commandment. The moral 
principle is one day out of seven set apart for the worship of 
God. The positive element is conditioned 
by the covenant. That's why in the old covenant 
it was Saturday, and in the new covenant it is Sunday. So in 
terms of positive law or ceremonial law, that justifies or legitimizes 
the day change. But in terms of the moral principle, 
And our confession of faith says it's not only the written word 
of God, but also the light of nature. There's something about 
us being created in the image of God, and we know that it's 
right to give God a part of our time. We know that it's right 
that if there is a creator and we are his creature, then we 
owe him something in terms of obedience and reverence and worship. So the confession underscores 
not only the fact that it comes through special revelation, but 
it's also signified in the light of nature or what we call natural 
theology. So there's the moral principle, 
and then there's the positive aspect. The positive aspect, 
again, is the legitimacy for the day change. Now, having looked 
at the exposition of the commandment, the Sabbath, and the Old Covenant, 
we turned our attention to the Sabbath in the New Covenant. 
And we first looked at the ministry of Jesus Christ. What passage 
did we look at first with reference to the ministry of Jesus Christ 
under his doctrine concerning the law? Does anybody remember 
that? Nope. That's the next section. So I broke it down. Ministry 
of Jesus, two ways. His doctrine concerning the law 
and his practice concerning the Sabbath. The practice concerning 
the Sabbath is Matthew 12. But where does Jesus give us 
his hermeneutics with reference to the Old Covenant? I would 
suggest it's all throughout the Gospel narratives. We shouldn't 
put too much weight on one particular passage, but it is a very important 
passage in terms of the study of biblical law. That's right. Does anybody know 
where that is? What? 517 to 20, that's right. So Jesus' 
popularity is growing, no doubt people are wondering, what does 
he think about the Old Testament? So Jesus says, unquivocally, 
don't think that I came to abolish, to do away with, to abrogate 
the law and the prophets. I didn't come to abolish, but 
rather to fulfill. He fulfills it in his own role 
as being the one that the prophets spoke of. He fulfills it in his 
work by being that lamb of God who takes away the sin of the 
world. But as well, he fulfills it in his teaching. He confirms 
it. He establishes it. He makes sure that persons understand 
it without all of the fair misunderstanding that had attached itself to a 
giving of the law. So, the ministry of Jesus with 
reference to the law, Matthew 5, and then his practice concerning 
the Sabbath in Matthew 12. When we look at Jesus' practice 
concerning the Sabbath, there's two works that we see that are 
lawful on the Sabbath day. Does anybody remember that? Categories. Works of necessity and works 
of mercy. Right. When Jesus upbraids the 
religious leaders of his day and he says, which one of you, 
having an ox or a sheep that falls into the ditch, doesn't 
fish it out of the ditch? Of course they did. And if that 
kind of a work of mercy was appropriate and wasn't a violation of the 
law, then Jesus healing a man on his paralytic bed for 38 years 
wasn't a breach of the law either. So when Jesus heals that woman 
who's hunched over for 18 years, that's a work of mercy. But then 
you have works of necessity. The sacrifices didn't sacrifice 
themselves in the time of the temple. You had a priestly class 
that was charged with laboring on the Sabbath day. It was a 
work of necessity to make sure that that cultus was observed, 
that it was executed, and that it was carried out. to the Sabbath 
command was never given to restrain legitimate works of mercy and 
necessity. Christ upholds that reality more 
often than not in his earthly ministry. And then next, moving 
to the New Covenant, we see not only the ministry of Jesus Christ, 
but what next big event really shows us that it is the first 
day of the week that the Church should be meeting on. The resurrection. That's right. The resurrection. Gospel writers take pains to 
make sure that we know that Jesus was raised on the first day. 
Now after having considered that, we went to Hebrews chapter 4, 
and you can rest assured we're not going to rehearse that whole 
section again tonight. But suffice to say, what we have 
in Hebrews chapter 4 are the twin themes of creation and redemption 
undergirding not only the original giving of the Sabbath and the 
Old Covenant, but the continuation of the Sabbath and the New Covenant. 
Remember in 4.9, there remains therefore a Sabbath rest for 
the people of God. Unequivocally, the apostle says 
there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God. 410 underscores 
the day. 410 is not describing the believer 
ceasing from his rest. 410 describes Christ ceasing 
from his work, and it's on the day of resurrection when he had 
completed the work of salvation. So the parallel in Hebrews chapter 
4 is God the Father who created the world and all things in it, 
and then He sabbathed according to chapter 2 of Genesis verses 
1 to 3. Well Christ orchestrates the 
new creation or redemption. So, the day that he completes 
that is the day of rest, and we call that the Lord's Day, 
or the Christian Sabbath, or the Resurrection Day. So, that 
brings us to new stuff tonight. With reference to the teaching 
of the apostles, we've got three more passages, and then we have 
three alleged anti-Sabbatarian New Testament texts. So, with 
reference to the next three passages, I want to want to demonstrate 
or rather assert that what we have is a precedent or a pattern 
and not a precept. A precept is a direct command. You must do this. You must not 
do that. That's a precept. Now, when it 
comes to Scripture, we see that precept is used often. The Ten 
Commandments are precepts. You shall have no other gods 
before me. You shall not make for yourself 
an idol. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in 
vain. So, these are precepts given that give us the particular 
content of a command that we're supposed to obey. But with reference 
to a precedent or pattern, there are certain things modeled for 
us by persons in the Bible that it's assumed that we're going 
to follow. And I think the most obvious example thus far in our 
study is Genesis chapter 2, 1-3. Again, Exodus 20 goes back to 
the creation account and parallels the Jew and the man, the woman, 
the recipient of the fourth commandment. Their rest is grounded in God's 
rest, which he expressed at the creation. So Genesis 2, 1-3 does 
not contain a precept or a command that mankind sabbaths. But when 
we get to Sinai, and this emphasis on remember, it connects us back 
to what God does. So there is this pattern. There 
is this precedent that has been established. Well, the same thing 
is true in the New Testament. There's not a precept in Romans 
17 that says thou must keep Sunday as the Christian Sabbath as the 
holy day of God. But when we look at the New Testament 
again, the apostles gathering together specifically in John's 
Gospel in John chapter 20, they did so on the first day of the 
week. Turn over to the book of Acts, 
Acts chapter 20. The texts are simple. They're 
the texts that are cited by our confession in the statement concerning 
the Sabbath. It's Acts 20, verse 7, 1 Corinthians 
16, 1 and 2, and then Revelation 1, 10. So that's where we're 
going. Notice at chapter 20 at verse 
6, "...we sailed away from Philippi after the days of unleavened 
bread, and in five days joined them at Troas, where we stayed 
seven days." So, if they had stayed there for seven days, 
that includes an entire week, right? It's not a stretch exegetically. If they were there seven days, 
it certainly included a Saturday. If they were there seven days, 
they would have been there on a Saturday. But notice verse 
7. Now on the first day of the week, 
when the disciples came together to break bread, When you see 
that concept or that idea of breaking bread in the New Testament, 
there are times when it could have been a common meal. They 
got together and had fajitas. They got together and ate mangoes. They got together and enjoyed 
tacos. Probably not specifically, but 
it doesn't always necessarily mean the sacrament. but that 
they broke bread on the first day of the week and Paul preached 
and continued his message until midnight seems to underscore 
that it's a worship service and the breaking of bread most likely 
is the Lord's Supper. So notice in verse 7, so on the 
first day of the week when the disciples came together to break 
bread, Paul, ready to depart the next day, spoke to them and 
continued his message until midnight. Here's your ground for long preaching, 
long sermons. There were many lamps in the 
upper room where they were gathered together, and in a window sat 
a certain young man named Eutychus who was sinking into a deep sleep. 
Now, of course, you'll all say, and here's your rationale for 
falling asleep in a sermon. Absolutely, we got it here. And 
he was sinking into a deep sleep. He was overcome by sleep, and 
as Paul continued speaking, he fell down from the third story 
and was taken up dead. But Paul went down, fell on him, 
and embracing him said, Do not trouble yourselves, for his life 
is in him. Now when he had come up and had 
broken bread and eaten, see that breaking of bread there, it's 
probably not the supper, it's probably something for sustenance, 
for health, for strengthening. And talked a long while, even 
until daybreak he departed, and they brought the young man in 
alive, and they were not a little comforted. So you have Paul in 
Troas, a full seven days, including the Jewish Sabbath, but the text 
specifically says they come together on the first day of the week 
to break bread. The commentator F.F. Bruce, and 
I don't know that F.F. Bruce was a Sabbatarian, I don't 
know that he had a confessional view, in terms of the Lord's 
Day, but he said the reference to the meeting for the breaking 
of bread on the first day of the week is the earliest text 
we have from which it may be inferred with reasonable certainty 
that Christians regularly came together for worship on that 
day. So again, by way of pattern, 
by way of precedent, not a strict commandment, all those who go 
to church in the city of Troas, thou must go on a Sunday. But 
we see what the apostles did when they gathered for worship, 
when they broke bread together, and when they had preaching services. 
They did it on the first day of the week. Notice, in 1 Corinthians 
chapter 16, the apostle Paul orders something here. He doesn't 
just suggest, he doesn't just say, you know, it might be a 
good idea, but he says in chapter 16 at verse 1, now concerning 
the collection for the saints, as I have given orders to the 
churches of Galatia, so you must do also." So it wasn't just something 
unique to the church at Corinth, but also the churches of Galatia, 
most likely the southern churches or the churches in southern Galatia 
Those that the apostle visited on his first missionary journey, 
they would have been established already by this particular time. 
It's to those churches that Paul writes Galatians specifically, 
because after he had gone through those churches, Judaizers had 
come along and said, you need to believe the gospel and you 
need to be circumcised. But as we'll see in a moment, 
they not only said you need to believe the gospel and be circumcised, 
but you also have to obey Israel's calendar. You have to engage 
in feast days, and you have to keep with all those things that 
were given to Old Covenant Israel according to their calendrical 
observances. But in this particular passage, 
he's not just singling out the church of Corinth, or the church 
in Corinth, but rather, as I have given orders to the churches 
of Galatia, so you must do also. On the first day of the week, 
let each one of you lay something aside, storing up as he may prosper, 
that there be no collections when I come. Why do you think 
he did that? Because there wasn't e-transfer. 
Why do you think he did that? Because he couldn't just pop 
onto his phone and have the money readily available to him. They 
would do it on the first day of the week because they were 
going to gather together as the church of the Lord Jesus Christ. Now, the third and final text 
is Revelation chapter 1. Again, these are the by-pattern 
or by-precedent texts that we observe. We'll look at the next 
three anti-Sabbatarian texts in a minute. But notice the vision 
at Patmos, the Lord's Day, Revelation chapter 1, verse 9. I, John, 
both your brother and companion in the tribulation and kingdom 
and patience of Jesus Christ, was on the island that is called 
Patmos for the word of God and for the testimony of Jesus Christ. 
I was in the Spirit on the Lord's Day, and I heard behind me a 
loud voice as of a trumpet saying, Now, the form of the word that 
is used here is where we get our word Kirk. There are Scottish 
churches that call themselves Kirks. I think the Dutch use 
Kirk as well. Well, that word Kirk is connected 
to this particular word. The typical word we think of 
in the New Testament when we think of church, does anybody 
know that particular Greek word? Ekklesia. That's right. Ekklesia. And everybody likes to say, well, 
it's the etymology, it's the called out one. No, it's the 
connection to the Qahal in the Old Testament. So the assembly 
of God's people in the Old Testament is called Qahal. The assembly 
of God's people in the New Testament is called Ekklesia. So typically 
that's how we refer to church life. So the word Kirk And probably 
church is modeled after the particular word that's used right here, 
kuriake. It's not ecclesia, but it's kuriake. Notice what it modifies. I was in the spirit on the Lord's 
day, kuriake day. Now this particular word means 
pertaining to or belonging to the Lord, the Lord's, that's 
what it means. Now, God owns Monday, and He 
owns Tuesday, and He owns Wednesday, and I'm not going to go through 
the whole week, but He owns Sunday in a way that is particularly 
His. The only other place in the New 
Testament where this word is used, it doesn't modify day, 
but it modifies supper. You can turn to 1 Corinthians 
chapter 11. 1 Corinthians chapter 11, the same use of that word 
karyake, which means pertaining to or belonging to the Lord. So notice in 1 Corinthians chapter 
11 at verse 20. Therefore, when you come together 
in one place, it is not to eat the Lord's supper. God owns every 
bit of food that he gives you to eat. Every good gift comes 
from our blessed heavenly father. So when you had dinner tonight, 
yeah, there's a sense where it was God's dinner that he has 
bestowed on you. But you see how the word is being 
used here. It modifies a particular supper. It modifies the time when the 
church comes together and they eat this bread and they drink 
this cup in remembrance of Jesus. So it's specifically called the 
Lord's Supper. Just like in Revelation chapter 
1, it's specifically called the Lord's Day. Now that this word 
is only used in this form twice, and it modifies day and it modifies 
supper, I think it's pretty strong evidence that God wants us to 
see something in the use of that particular word. So the use of 
the word in Revelation 1.10, it's not the eschatological day 
of the Lord. I was in the Spirit on the Lord's 
day. Some take it as that day of judgment 
or the preceding time to that day of judgment. No, it meant 
Sunday. John was on the island of Patmos 
for the Word of God and for the testimony of the Lord. And while 
he's on the island of Patmos, he's in the Spirit. In other 
words, the Spirit has come upon him, the Spirit is going to show 
him these visions, and the Spirit is going to command him to write. 
Notice, specifically at chapter 1 in verse 19, Jesus says, write 
the things which you have seen, the things which are, and the 
things which are about to take place after this. That's the 
program for what follows in Revelation. So this is sort of the introductory 
vision where Christ comes to the apostle on the island of 
Patmos, and he gives him this instruction to write the things 
which you have seen, the things which are, and the things which 
are about to take place after this. In other words, the language 
that he uses in that third part is a billion years from now. I think he's speaking about stuff 
that was going to happen in John's lifetime. But back to verse 10, 
I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, that which pertains to, 
or that which belongs specifically to the Lord. So Kirk, or church, 
is a good sort of expression of that reality. Now, there's 
a fellow by the name of James Durham, and James Durham wrote 
a commentary on the book of Revelation about that thick. If anybody 
wants to read it, have a good time. But he makes this observation, 
as the Lord's Supper is for the remembrance of his death till 
he come again, so is this day for remembering the work of redemption 
and his resurrection till he come again. We saw that in Hebrews 
chapter 4. The theology behind it is that 
if the Sabbath functioned in the Old Covenant as an encouragement 
to the people of God to persevere to their ultimate rest, then 
why would we think God would do away with that encouragement 
in the New Covenant when the New Covenant people of God need 
encouragement and help for their perseverance to their final and 
eternal rest? In other words, if God gave that 
good gift to Old Covenant Israel, then God gives that good gift 
to New Covenant Israel, which is the Church of the Lord Jesus 
Christ. So the principle remains, one 
day out of seven, that we give specifically to our God. With 
reference to the ceremonial or the positive aspect, the day 
has been changed from Saturday to Sunday in the context of the 
works of redemption and revelation. We see the church worshiping 
in Troas on the first day of the week. We see the apostle 
call for a collection to be taken up on the first day of the week. 
We see the apostle John on the island of Patmos in the Spirit 
on the first day of the week, on the Lord�s Day. Intriguingly, 
that's what the early church called Sunday. They called it the Lord's Day. 
That's why we call it the Lord's Day, because the Bible calls 
it the Lord's Day. It is something pertaining to 
Him, something that belongs to Him. Just like He owns every 
meal that you and I will ever eat, so He owns every day that 
you and I will ever live. but there's a particular supper 
and there's a particular day that are specifically predicated 
to belong to God, to belong to our Lord Jesus Christ. Now, in 
terms of the alleged anti-sabbatarian texts, turn to Romans chapter 
14. I think a good principle in interpretation of Scripture, 
a good principle of hermeneutics is context. What is the context 
speaking of? Is the context speaking of the 
Sabbath? Arguably, Romans 14 is not. Romans 14 primarily is concerned 
with Christian liberty. Now, in the context, it has to 
do most likely with Jewish food laws and the Jewish calendar. Remember, in the first century, 
you had Jews, by grace, coming to faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. As well, you had Gentiles, by 
grace, coming to faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. When these 
Jews and Gentiles got together, there was harmony, there was 
love, there was peace, but there was also tension. There was also 
difficulty. You see in Acts 15, there was 
a whole council convened to deal with the issue. Do believing 
Gentiles have to be circumcised in order to be counted among 
the people of God? That was a real issue they had 
to deal with in Acts 15, and of course they dealt with it 
decisively, and they said no, a Gentile doesn't have to be 
circumcised in order to be a believer in Jesus Christ. But you can 
see where the Jews might have concluded this. The Jews might 
have thought, well, you know, we got circumcised, and we obey 
the calendar, and he is Israel's Messiah, and now that these Gentiles 
are coming to Israel's Messiah, ergo, they should have to go 
through what we've gone through. They should be circumcised too. 
They should follow the calendar too. They should engage in these 
practices too. So that's why the early church 
combats this, and that's why specifically in the Apostle Paul's 
writing, the emphasis is on justification by faith alone. Now, if you want 
to observe the Jewish calendar, or if you want to get circumcised, 
and you don't attach to it any sort of religious significance, 
vis-a-vis, you're going to be accepted by God for it, then 
go ahead. The Apostle Paul took oaths and 
the Apostle Paul still followed some of those particular laws 
so that he would not offend Jewish people. Remember that he had 
Timothy circumcised when he took him into certain parts because 
persons knew that Timothy's father was a Gentile and his mother 
was a Jew. And so Timothy submitted to circumcision 
by the Apostle Paul's commandment so that they wouldn't offend 
unbelievers. So Paul doesn't have a problem 
per se with circumcision. It's not that he's, you know, 
one of these anti-circumcision people that, you know, is campaigning 
actively for, you know, that to never take place. He's got 
a problem when persons attach religious significance, specifically 
acceptance with God, in terms of circumcision. Everybody get 
that? So this was an issue that happened 
in the early church. You've got Jews, you've got Gentiles. 
The Jews still had their customs. The Jews still had their ethnic 
practices. They still engaged in circumcision. 
They still had their calendar. They still had their sacrifices 
and all that sort of thing. So the apostles main emphasis 
in chapter 14 of the book of Romans is not to offend one another 
in matters of Christian liberty. Those things that are not commanded 
by God, those things that persons have liberty with reference to, 
the people that engage in or disengage in must not treat each 
other poorly. In other words, just because 
somebody doesn't share your opinion on a thing indifferent doesn't 
mean they're hell-bound sinners. And just because somebody dots 
an I or crosses a T on a liberty issue in a way that you don't 
agree with, Keep your mouth shut. It's not your business to judge 
them. It's not your business to call 
into question their ethics or their conduct. So notice, verse 
1 of chapter 14, receive one who is weak in the faith, but 
not to disputes over doubtful things. For one believes he may 
eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables." So 
you see there's something there about food. Now obviously we 
take it into our modern context and say, you know, this text 
obviously condemns veganism. You guys all just need to throw 
off your salads and eat a big steak. That's probably not what's 
in view here. Again, it's most likely having 
to do with foods used in sacrifice, most likely things that were 
kosher killed or whatnot. But the idea is that there is 
this disparity among people. Verse 2, one believes he may 
eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables. Now 
jump to verse 5, one person esteems one day above another, another 
esteems every day alike. let each be fully convinced in 
his own mind. He who observes the day, observes 
it to the Lord, and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord 
he does not observe it. He who eats, eats to the Lord, 
for he gives God thanks, and he who does not eat, to the Lord 
he does not eat, and gives God thanks." A far cry different 
than Paul's emphasis in Romans 3.31. What do we say then? Do we nullify the law? No, rather 
we establish the law. Paul is very pro nomos, Paul 
is very much for the law as long as it's used lawfully. What's 
going on here again has to do with eating and drinking, not 
connected to religious services, and it has to do with calendrical 
observances not connected to religious services. The Jews 
had a lot of things going on on their calendar. Paul's point 
specifically is the matter of Christian liberty. Notice the 
principle that he lays out in verse 3. Here's his point. Let not him who eats despise 
him who does not eat, and let not him who does not eat judge 
him who eats, for God has received him. See, there's this tendency, 
if we just use the bare meaning of the text in verse 2, the meat 
eater looks down on the vegetarian and says, come on, get with the 
program, God made steak, it's beautiful, go ahead and eat. 
But there's a tendency among the weaker brethren that won't 
eat the steak to judge the guy who eats the steak. See, we often 
think that sin is only confined to one class of people. No, we 
all have tendencies to sin, no matter our station, no matter 
our condition. I love the scripture, the Old 
Testament scripture, when it tells the judges not to show 
partiality to the poor. Why? Because you can't be a bleeding 
heart liberal and expect to have a good justice system. If a poor 
man breaks the law, he should be punished accordingly. If a 
rich man breaks the law, he should be punished accordingly. That's 
how you apply the law. So when it comes to this particular 
principle, it's a matter of Christian liberty. The strong brother has 
a tendency to look down on the weak or to despise them, and 
the weak brother has the tendency to judge him who eats. The apostle 
gives the principle that should direct both the strong and the 
weak in verse 4. Who are you to judge another 
servant? To his own master he stands or 
falls. Indeed he will be made to stand, 
for God is able to make him stand. You're not supposed to judge. 
Again, if somebody's committing adultery, or somebody steals, 
or somebody's done an actual sin, then by all means rebuke 
him, reprove him, do what Matthew 18 says. But if it's a matter 
of diet, if it's a matter of conviction, if it's a matter 
of preference, if it's a matter of, you know, I believe under 
God I have this particular liberty, you're not supposed to judge 
that person. I know it's in us to do that. 
I know that's the, well, that person this, or that person that. 
I think Paul's point is mind your own business. I know that's 
a lost and forgotten principle of common life, but it's certainly 
one that needs recovery. So the emphasis in Romans 14 
is on matters of indifference, on matters of what we call Christian 
liberty, adiaphora, things indifferent. Those things that aren't commanded 
by God to either A. observe or B. to abstain from. There are liberty issues. God 
gives us some freedom. Not some. He gives us complete 
freedom. But the Bible doesn't specify 
every jot and tittle of our lives. We may come to some different 
conclusions. One of the big issues that happens in church is alcohol. 
Can we drink alcohol or can't we? You get some who judge, people 
who do, and you get others who do, they look down on others. 
And then you've got all these problems with, you know, well, 
if it offends my brother, as Paul uses that language in 1 
Corinthians, well, then I'll never do it again. Or does Paul 
mean when somebody comes over? he's not going to flaunt it. 
Does it mean he never ever eats a piece of meat? Or does it mean 
when his weak brother is sitting across from him, he doesn't eat 
meat? Probably the latter. I mean, Paul is extra holy, so 
maybe he never did eat meat again. But I don't think you're wrong 
if you have a brother that is perhaps a weaker brother, and 
he's not at your house, go ahead and enjoy the steak. But if he 
happens to come over and he cringes at the thought of you eating 
a steak, Then love your brother and don't eat the steak. Have 
some kale and rejoice with them. But the point is, we're not supposed 
to do that to one another. But one of the other things that 
I think we ought to appreciate with reference to this text is 
that Paul does not have a problem categorizing one group as weak 
and the other as strong. Now, what's the ultimate goal? It's that the weak people get 
strong, isn't it? It's that the weak people don't 
cringe when somebody, you know, sinks their mouth into that stake. It's so that they don't judge 
people without any biblical warrant to do it. I mean, we don't want 
a whole class or churches filled with weak people. We want to 
instruct people such that their consciences are informed. Sometimes 
you'll hear people say that, well, my conscience won't allow 
it. Have you ever allowed for the fact that perhaps your conscience 
is wrong? You need to be informed by God's 
Word concerning your conscience, not according to your whim or 
your preferences or when I was raised. No, it's the Word of 
God that should inform the consciences of God's people. There's nothing 
wrong with abstaining, there's nothing wrong with engaging, 
as long as we do it within the confines of God's law, God's, 
you know, the orbit of God's revelation, but the bottom line 
is we're not to judge people or despise people because they 
differ in something. So again, when you look at verse 
five, one person esteems one day above another, another esteems 
every day alike. That doesn't jive with what we've 
been reading. That doesn't jive with what we've 
been seeing. Paul understood Isaiah 56. Paul 
understood Isaiah 58. Paul understood gathering the 
church together on the first day of the week. Paul understood 
commanding the churches of Corinth and Galatia to set apart money 
on the first day of the week. Paul understood this. He's not 
dealing with the Sabbath day. He's not dealing with the fourth 
commandment. He's dealing with other days that persons held 
near and dear to their hearts and most likely observed for 
either ethnicity, perhaps religious, whatever the issue was, you're 
not supposed to judge the Gentile who doesn't observe that particular 
day in the way that you do. And again, notice how he sort 
of grounds this admonition. So verse 5, one person esteems 
one day above another, another esteems every day alike. Let 
each be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the 
day, observes it to the Lord. He who does not observe the day, 
to the Lord he does not observe it. He who eats, eats to the 
Lord, for he gives God thanks. And he who does not eat, to the 
Lord he does not eat, and gives God thanks. The way he just interchangeably 
goes from days to food, again, it reeks of Jewish practice. It reeks of the transition period 
when Jews and Gentiles are now up in each other's business, 
and having to figure out, how are we going to do this together? 
Paul is giving them instruction. Now notice verse 7, For none 
of us lives to himself, and no one dies to himself. For if we 
live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. 
Therefore, whether we live or die, we are the Lord's. For to 
this end Christ died and rose and lived again, that he might 
be Lord of both the dead and the living. But why do you judge 
your brother? Or why do you show contempt for 
your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat 
of Christ, for it is written, as I live, says the Lord, every 
knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. 
So then each of us shall give account of himself to God. Therefore 
let us not judge one another any more, but rather resolve 
this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our 
brother's way. Now when you take that and you 
jump over to 1 Corinthians like 8 to 10, again you see the emphasis 
is on Jewish stuff And again, the process is, is how much do 
the Gentiles, or do the Gentiles, need to do Jewish stuff? Acts 
15 was the decisive counsel, but it didn't correct everything. There were still issues, just 
like Elijah at Mount Carmel vanquished Baal worship, at least for a 
time, but guess what? Later on, they re-worshipped 
Baal. So, just because the Jews and 
the Gentiles were given, you know, a council and instruction 
and letters and epistles, doesn't mean that everything just automatically 
fell into place. Just like today, the same sort 
of tensions that we have in churches, where there's differences of 
this, that, or the other. So, I would argue that Romans 
14 is not dealing with the Sabbath commandment given in the Decalogue. Ames, the marrow of theology, 
says the Apostle in Romans 14 expressly speaks of the judgment 
about certain days, which then produced offense among Christians. 
But the observance of the Lord's day, which the Apostle himself 
teaches, had already taken place in all the churches, 1 Corinthians 
16, and could not be the occasion of offense. It is most probable 
that the Apostle in this passage is treating of a dispute about 
the choosing of days to eat or to refuse certain meats, for 
the question is put in Romans 14, 2 about meats only, and in 
verses 5 and 6 the related problem of duty is discussed. And the 
remainder of the chapter he considers only meats, making no mention 
of days." Again, it's most likely relative to the Jews and the 
various things that they had concerns for. Now turn over to 
Galatians 4. Galatians 4, we typically understand 
that the book of Galatians is Paul's condemnation of Judaizers, 
and the Judaizers again were guys that came after Paul's first 
missionary journey. So in about AD 48 to 50, 48, 
49, Paul makes his missionary journey through the churches 
of Southern Galatia. According to Acts chapter 14, 
when he comes back through those areas, they stop at each of the 
churches, they appoint elders in those churches, and then Paul 
returns to Antioch. So, not long after that, Paul 
writes Galatians. I mean, Galatians, most scholars 
believe, is the apostle's first letter that he wrote. And why 
he wrote it is because the Judaizers, after Paul went through these 
churches, the Judaizers came along and said, what Paul said 
is good. Jesus is Israel's Messiah, and he's a wonderful Messiah. 
Believe on him. but you also need to be circumcised. You also 
need to submit to these laws of Moses. You need to take on 
these ceremonial observances in order to be saved. Again, 
it's not a custom, it's not an ethnic practice, it's not a, 
you know, kind of a thing that's preferable for those who confess 
faith in Jesus. Look at Galatians chapter 5. 
Paul gives us or tips his hand with reference to his emphasis 
in the book. So 5-1, stand fast therefore 
in the liberty by which Christ has made us free and do not be 
entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Indeed I Paul say 
to you that if you become circumcised Christ will profit you nothing. 
Paul had Timothy circumcised. That was different. We have to 
appreciate that. For Paul to say what he says 
here, and then for Paul to engage in what he did with Timothy, 
it was different circumstances. It was a different situation. 
Paul did not have Timothy circumcised so that Timothy could go to heaven. 
Paul had Timothy circumcised so that they could move freely 
around Jewish regions without creating unnecessary offense. 
But the problem in Galatia is this idea that if you believe 
Jesus plus circumcision is necessary, then you've invalidated Jesus. 
You have chosen the covenant of works as your way of approach 
to God Almighty. That's why the hard language. 
Indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ 
will profit you nothing. And I testify again to every 
man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole 
law. You see, when the Judaizers come and they say faith in Jesus 
plus circumcision, it's not just faith in Jesus plus circumcision. If you opt for circumcision, 
then you've invalidated Jesus. You've gotten rid of the covenant 
of grace. Now it's all up to you in terms of the covenant 
of works, and therefore you are a debtor to keep the whole law. 
You either come to God through the mediation of our Lord Jesus 
Christ, or you come to God in your own strength. If you choose 
circumcision, you're signing up for the covenant of works, 
and you're signing up for entering into God's presence based on 
what you've done. That's why Galatians 2.21. I 
do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness comes 
through the law, then Christ died in vain." In other words, 
if you can get circumcised and observe the Jewish calendar and 
eat certain meats, then why in the world would Jesus have to 
come live, die, and be raised again. So that's the polemic 
of Galatians. He's not condemning ethnic Jewish 
practices per se, because Paul participated in ethnic Jewish 
practices himself, not least of which was the circumcising 
of Timothy. But in this particular context, 
it's not a Jewish ethnic sort of function or an engagement. here it is religious in nature 
with the intention of gaining our justification through faith 
plus works. Verse 4, you have become estranged 
from Christ. Chapter 5, you who attempt to 
be justified by law. See, that's the point that Paul 
has in Galatia. It's not, oh you got circumcised, 
you're going to hell. Oh, you eat this, you're going 
to hell. That's not what he's doing. You have become estranged 
from Christ, you attempt to be justified by law. Now notice 
this, you have fallen from grace. How many times have you heard 
that in a Facebook discussion? Armenians say, well there it 
is, you can fall from grace. That's not the point of the apostle. He's not saying you can be saved 
and then fall from grace. He is saying, there's one of 
two ways that you approach God. Covenant of works, covenant of 
grace. If you choose the covenant of 
works, You've fallen from grace. You've fallen from the covenant 
of grace. You have turned your back on 
it. You have defected from it. If you opt for that, understand 
that you're a debtor to keep the whole law. So Paul is vindicating 
justification by faith alone. But notice that Paul is not anti-law. Law is great provided it's in 
the context where we use it lawfully, vis-a-vis sanctification. But 
back to verse 5 there, �For we through the Spirit eagerly wait 
for the hope of righteousness by faith. For in Christ Jesus 
neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything but faith working 
through love.� Now, then drop down to verse 16, just so you 
can see that Paul has a robust understanding of God's law and 
its application to the Christian, not as a means for justification, 
but as a means of or a pattern for sanctification for those 
justified by grace. Notice in verse 16, I say then, 
walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh. 
For the flesh lusts against the spirit, the spirit against the 
flesh, and these are contrary to one another, so that you do 
not do the things that you wish. That's a passage that validates 
what we call remaining corruption. There is still a principle in 
the believer, the best of believers, that he wants to go out and sin 
sometimes, and the apostle treats that. And then verse 18, if you 
are led by the spirit, you are not under the law. For the works 
of the flesh are evident, which are adultery, fornication, uncleanness, 
lewdness, idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, 
outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, envy, 
murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like, of which I tell 
you beforehand, just as I told you in time past, that those 
who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God." 
that there is remaining things in your heart is a reality, but 
the practicing of those things betrays Christian faith. So the idea isn't sinless perfectionism, 
the idea is that there is that warfare, there is that genuine 
desire, you are trying to kill sin, even though once in a while 
you mess up, but there is forgiveness with God. Now notice what he 
says in verse 22, but the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, 
longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control. 
Notice what the next clause says, against such there is no law. What's the implication? Against 
the previous there is a law, and it commands you not to go 
out and act like that kind of a wretch. When it comes to the 
practice of righteousness, there is no law. You get to do that 
as much as you want. You go out and love. You go out 
and be gentle. You go out and be self-control. 
There's no law external to you saying, well, you can only have, 
you know, 15 units of self-control and no more. No, no, against 
such there is no law. The implication is, is that before, 
in terms of the vice-less, there is a law and it condemns that 
kind of practice. So Paul is pro-law, pro-namas, 
we might say. Now go to Galatians 4. Actually, we're gonna stop there 
and go to Galatians 4 next Wednesday. I do not wanna, I have a private 
covenant with myself and all of you that we will not go past 
nine, and I don't wanna exceed that boundary. You may have cows 
at home that need milking, so I don't wanna keep you from that. 
We'll get to Galatians 4.10 next time, and we'll work through 
that, and then the last text, and then we'll summarize the 
teaching on the Christian Sabbath, specifically the fourth commandment 
from Exodus chapter 20. So the stage has been set. Hopefully 
you understand what Galatians is about. Next week, I'll probably 
give a little bit of that just by way of introduction, and then 
we'll jump into 410. Just a spoiler alert, it has 
nothing to do with the Christian Sabbath. It has nothing to do 
with the Fourth Commandment. It has to do with the Jewish 
calendar. So, let's close in a word of 
prayer, and then if there's any questions or comments, we can 
do that. Our Father in heaven, we thank you for the word of 
God. We thank you for this privilege that we have to have it, to be 
having been given it by you to us. Help us to be students of 
your word, help us to be humble under that word and help us to 
love it, to have it dwell in our hearts richly through faith. 
And we pray that you would just bless this local church, go with 
us now, grant us safety and grace and peace and bring us together 
on the Lord's day that we may worship you and speak