We must defend the Lord’s Day.
Opponents of Christian Sabbatarianism (specifically, anti-sabbatarians) are quick either to pity us as weak brethren or decry us as staunch legalists by citing several passages which they believe destroy any notion of sacred time and days in the NT.
- Romans 14:5-6: 5One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God.
- Colossians 2:16-17: “16Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath [literally, Sabbaths]. 17These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.”
- Galatians 4:8-11: 8Formerly, when you did not know God, you were enslaved to those that by nature are not gods. 9But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn back again to the weak and worthless elementary principles of the world, whose slaves you want to be once more? 10You observe days and months and seasons and years! 11I am afraid I may have labored over you in vain.
Do these passages really teach that all days are alike in the church age, that the Sabbath Day has completely disappeared like a shadow, and that Sabbath-Day observance now in the gospel age is likened to being enslaved to weak, worthless, and worldly elementary principles? Do these passages really give us the freedom to formulate our own convictions concerning when to worship God?
1.) If this interpretation is correct, it is absurd.
If there is no distinction of days any longer, no one has the right to tell individual Christians when to worship God—not even the churches they are members of! In fact, for a church to impose on its members a day every week for corporate worship would be to infringe upon their Christian liberty. For example, if someone is convinced that worshiping God on Saturday is best for him, then no one should be able to tell him he is in sin for never showing up for Sunday services! After all, Saturday is the day he esteems as better than the rest!
Richard Barcellos comments, “If the words, ‘Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind’ refer to the Lord’s Day, the first day of the week, as well as all other days, how could a church discipline any of its members for forsaking the assembly of the saints, let alone encourage them to assemble on a stated day?”[2]
2.) If this interpretation is correct, it contradicts what we have already seen about the uniqueness of the first day of the week.
Clearly the NT teaches something special about the first day of the week. And the early church affirmed this belief. But if there is no distinction of days (or if the 7th Day Sabbath still exists), every mention of the first day of the week loses most if not all its significance. The facts that on the first day of the week Jesus rose from the dead, Jesus appeared to His disciples, the Spirit was poured out and the church was established, Christians gathered together for corporate worship, and the apostle John calls it the Lord’s Day would be merely coincidental if there is nothing inherently special or sacred about that day. Jesus’ first-day resurrection would become a good fact to know but not a life-changing truth to embrace. And the entire early church would have been mistaken to hold their worship services on Sunday!
3.) If this interpretation is correct, it proves too much.
The elimination of sacred time also leads to the elimination of sacred meals. Why do I say this? Because in Romans 14 and Colossians 2, days and diets are linked together. If there is now in the gospel age no distinction of days, there is also now no distinction of meals. And if there are no longer any sacred meals, what does that mean for the Lord’s Supper?
To be consistent, it would mean that along with the Lord’s Day, the Lord’s Supper should be seen as a common meal and its observance a matter of Christian liberty! Richard Barcellos comments, “Romans 14 cannot be a universal law against all holy days, just as it cannot be a universal law against all holy food and drink, and neither can Galatians 4 or Colossians 2. If they were, the Lord’s Supper could just as well be observed by using tacos and beer.”[3]
4.) Some have argued that these passages are not referring to the weekly Sabbath Day but to festival sabbath days.
There are many sound commentators who argue that Paul is not dealing with the weekly Sabbath here but is referring to the numerous religious festival days in the Jewish calendar. In other words, Paul speaks about days that were ceremonial in nature and uniquely Jewish, like the Passover, the Feast of the Firstfruits, the Feast of Weeks, the Feast of Trumpets, the Day of Atonement, and the Feast of Booths where a special holy sabbath rest was required for the Israelites.
They argue that what Paul is saying is that the Jewish calendar made up of feasts, new moons, and sabbaths (Colossians 2:16) and special days, months, seasons, and years (Galatians 4:10) has passed away in Christ and holds no authority over the NT Christian.
Albert Barnes is representative of this perspective: “The word Sabbath in the Old Testament is applied not only to the seventh day, but to all the days of holy rest that were observed by the Hebrews, and particularly to the beginning and close of their great festivals. There is, doubtless, reference to those days in this place, since the word is used in the plural number [“sabbaths”], and the apostle does not refer particularly to the Sabbath properly so called.”[4]
5.) If these passages also refer to the weekly Sabbath Day, they refer to the shadowy shape of the OT Sabbath, not its everlasting standard.
Although I appreciate the position just explained, I don’t think it goes far enough. I believe these passages not only refer to the OT occasional Sabbaths but also to the OT weekly Sabbath. They teach us that the Sabbath Day has passed away in its Old Covenant form! Regarding the weekly Sabbath, the 7th Day Sabbath has passed away.
This is especially true in Colossians 2:16-17. Part of the Colossian heresy was the teaching that Christians had to keep all kinds of old creation/old order institutions, including OT laws. But the apostle Paul says no! In this passage, he alludes to Hosea 2:11 which proclaims the end of “her Sabbaths”, i.e. Israel’s Sabbaths, in the gospel age. He then calls the Jewish Sabbaths “a shadow of the things to come”. The word “shadow” is also used in the book of Hebrews to describe the OT tabernacle (Hebrews 8:5, “a copy and shadow of the heavenly things”) and the entire Mosaic law (Hebrews 10:1, “the law has but a shadow of the good things to come”).
This means the shadowy Mosaic Old Covenant disappears in light of the arrival of its fulfillment, Jesus Christ and His New Covenant. Tabernacle/temple worship, animal sacrifices, dietary laws, circumcision, and 7th Day Sabbath observance are all laid to rest in the new age that Christ has instituted.
But the apostle Paul says nothing about the Sabbath Day as a natural/moral law and creation ordinance. What he says has to do with the old creation version of the Sabbath; the Sabbath instituted at the beginning of creation and specifically tailored to the nation of Israel “until the time of reformation” (Hebrews 9:10).
Therefore, we can affirm that the shadowy, 7th Day Sabbath has been abolished without having to affirm that the Sabbath Day has been eliminated altogether. All these passages teach us is that the Jewish appendages and attachments and ceremonies associated with the Sabbath Day have been abolished in the light of the coming of Christ and the new creation. They do not teach us that the Sabbath Day principle has vanished!
Sam Waldron states, “The passing of the positive institution of the observance of a religious rest on the seventh day of every week, known popularly as the Sabbath, may be asserted without at the same time asserting that the natural and moral foundation of that institution has been wrecked. The passing of the seventh-day observance of rest may be asserted without denying the coming of a positive institution which the first day of the week is observed as a day of rest or a Sabbath.”[5]
[1] Richard Barcellos, Getting the Garden Right, 225-226.
[2] Richard Barcellos, Getting the Garden Right, 225.
[3] Richard Barcellos, Getting the Garden Right, 225. Sadly, there are professing Christians who observe the Lord’s Supper in a similar way. For example, the Christian rapper Lecrae’s Twitter post on 1/2/22 read, “Just did communion at home with wheat bread and apple juice. I hope this still counts.”
[4] Albert Barnes, comments on Colossians 2:16.
[5] Sam Waldron, The Lord’s Day, 93-94.
