The sin the Church forgot, part 1: on keeping the Sabbath

* The following series of posts were originally prepared in the form of a paper, which I made available to the congregation at the time of writing (in 2011).   I have divided the paper into 2 parts.  I have also  included here 4 pictures of well known heroes of the faith who though apart on other issues were agreed on the gospel and agreed on the Sabbath.   They are John Wesley, George Whitefield, George Muller and Charles Spurgeon.

It is sometimes supposed that we can "head off" a discussion about the Sabbath by quoting Colossians 2:16-17.  This is a logical fallacy known as begging the question.  It is a kind of circular argument in which the conclusion is included in the premise.  Generations of Protestants (Baptist, Methodist, Anglican, Presbyterian, Reformed) believed that Christians are to keep the Sabbath (on Sunday), and they were - of course - familiar with Colossians 2.  Indeed, the argument to come addresses and deals with that important passage in Colossians, so it is quite wrong to presume this whole discussion can be avoided simply by quoting the very passage that is in question!

"Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets.  I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.  For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.  Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he hall be called great in the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 5.17-19)."[1] 

Homosexuality and the Sabbath

Have you ever considered what might happen if the churches together decided that we were no longer bound by the 7^th commandment, “Thou shalt not commit adultery”?  In the last decade many of us have grown increasingly concerned by changing definitions of marriage both in society and in the Church.   A dramatic shift is underway, and many professing Christians are caught up in it.  Still, there are many voices (particularly in the evangelical churches) crying for a return to the old paths.  While some have abandoned Biblical standards in favour of cultural norms, there are yet many Christian leaders who remain unflinching in their defense of the truth.  What if their voices were silenced? 

Very soon a new generation will take our place.  Suppose the next generation decides their fathers and grandfathers were wrong.  It may stretch the imagination, but it is yet possible that future generations will grow up in the Church, committed to their Bibles, zealous for the gospel, and committed to Jesus, while convinced that the 7th commandment is no longer binding.  Perhaps they will insist that a shift has taken place from old to new covenant.  What was once forbidden under the rigours and shadows of a lesser covenant must now be sanctioned because replaced by a better.  Probably, they will tell us that the old system was a hard and dreadful burden, and they will urge us to rejoice in our new found freedom.  Almost certainly they will use the very gospel we love and cherish to do this; and with the gospel they will proudly and brazenly sanction all forms of adultery and fornication, including easy divorce, open marriages, same-sex marriages, and even polygamous marriages.

Do you wonder what might happen if this bit of fiction became fact?  Would God bless the churches?  Would He overlook their ignorance and pour out His Spirit upon them as week after week they gathered for worship?  As they cried out for revival would He hear?  We know very well He wouldn’t.  “When you spread out your hands, I will hide my eyes from you; even though you make many prayers, I will not hear (Isaiah 1.15).”  Were we there among them we would cry out in answer to their perplexity at the impotence of the Church and failure of their prayers, “Behold, the LORD’s hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear (Isaiah 59.1-2).” 

If this fiction were our reality some of us might even approach out local pastor, take him by the arm, open up the Scriptures and with tears in our eyes plead and reason with him: “And now, O priests, this commandment is for you.  If you will not hear, and if you will not take it to heart, to give glory to my name, says the LORD of hosts, I will send a curse upon you, and I will curse your blessings.  Yes, I have cursed them already, because you do not take it to heart… For the lips of a priest should keep knowledge, and people should seek the law from his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts.  But you have departed from the way; you have caused many to stumble at the law… (Malachi 2:1-2, 7-8a).”  We would plead with him for the sake of the Church and for the sake of the name and honour of our King, and we would urge him to return to God’s Word.  We would tell him the gospel is no license for sin; and we would gently but urgently remind him that “sin is the transgression of the law (1 John 3.4)” and those who love God obey His commandments (John 14.15; 15.14; 1 John 5.2-3).

The notion that the Church could en masse change its mind about adultery and fornication may seem improbable, but is it so impossible?  We might think that dropping a commandment would be a hard sell on the people of God; and yet, in just a few decades the Church has done just that.  Almost en masse she has changed her mind about the 4^th commandment.  Some in the Church are calling for a moratorium on the subject of same-sex marriage.  They want time for the Church to pause, pray and conference together.  To my knowledge there was no such moratorium on the subject of the Sabbath.  There was no gathering of church leaders to conference, pray and deliberate together.  It simply disappeared.  The world led the way and the Church learned to justify its conformity by classing the Sabbath command among the ceremonial laws that have long since passed way.  

It is no small irony that once again – this time on the point of sexual orientation - the world is leading the way and the Church learning to justify its conformity by classing some of the particulars of the 7^th command among the ceremonial laws.[2]  Leading apologists in defense of gay marriage are making the very same arguments that were used to justify the abandonment of the Sabbath, and while the evangelical world reacts with horror at their ability to wrest the plain meaning of Scripture, there is this strange and stubborn inconsistency on the subject of the Sabbath.  

For hundreds of years the Church was almost unanimous in its treatment of the Sabbath command.  Indeed, on this Wesley and Whitfield were in perfect agreement.  Though divided on many other points of doctrine, they came together to declare that Sunday is the Christian Sabbath. 

 It has not been a hundred years since the Church changed her mind, and already the voice of our forebears has been all but lost.   Sadly, few anymore even know what our forefathers thought.  Today we urge people to weigh carefully the testimony of Church history before adopting new theories about adultery and sexual orientation.  We urge caution and reason, and sometimes with tears we warn of the potential consequences if in her haste the Church should choose to disobey.  Here, I want to plead caution and reason.  Nothing is easier than to drift along with the current of popular opinion.  Certainly, many have already made up their minds about the Sabbath and most (!) without hardly a moment’s thought.  This is nothing if not foolhardy.  If only for the sake of consistency we ought to be careful lest in our ignorance we bring upon the Church curses rather than blessings.[3] 

Should the Church abandon its stance in defense of marriage it will be very difficult for future generations to turn the tide.  Nonetheless, you would hope that in the face of prevailing opinion your grand-children and great grand-children would deal faithfully with the Word of God – that this Book would be their one and only rule of faith and practice even if it meant standing alone.  You would hope that rather than mindlessly embrace the values of their generation, they would weigh carefully the values and opinions of their forefathers.  You would hope that they would take time to pray and even fast before turning away from the testimony of Church history. 

Many of us are perplexed by the impotence of the North American Church.  We are grieved to discover how fast and far our nations have fallen and how little the Church has been able to do to stem the tide.  Churches across the continent are pleading with God for revival, asking that He would rend the heavens and come down, and to no avail.  Years ago a small group of men in the Hebrides gathered in a barn to pray for revival.  As they were praying suddenly one of them stood up and said “Brethren, it seems to me just  so much humbug to be waiting and praying as we are, if we ourselves are not rightly related to God.”[4]  For decades we have been talking about revival, holding conferences on revival, praying and fasting for revival.  It is time we asked ourselves that same question: is the Church – am I - rightly related to God?  Is it possible that God has withdrawn His hand of blessing because of our disobedience to His commandment?  Please at least give this subject the attention you would want a misguided and apostate generation to give to the matter of sexual orientation.  We are dealing now with one of God’s commandments.  Proceed cautiously.  Weigh carefully the testimony of Church history, study the Scriptures and pray for guidance.

Growing up without the Sabbath

I did not grow up in a Sabbath keeping home.[5]   We were taught that under the new covenant every day is a Sabbath.  I will admit I’m not sure how that ought to look,[6] but in our family it meant that on Sundays we went to church in the morning (and sometimes in the evening) and then used the rest of the day however we wanted.[7]  The other 6 days of the week were treated very much like they are in most other homes.  Monday through Friday were for work and school, and Saturday was given to house chores and play time.  I grew up, left home, and graduated seminary still convinced of what I had been taught.  I had met a few Sabbath keepers along the way and tried valiantly to rid them of their burden.  I could not understand why anyone would trade their liberty for bondage.  There was also the matter of Biblical testimony.  Hadn’t they read Romans 14.5-6 and Colossians 2.16-17?  It seemed, at the time, that even Jesus was against the Sabbath.   It was Jesus, after all, who had said the Sabbath was made for man rather than the other way around (Mark 2.27). 

The truth is - as Sinclair Ferguson once put it - like many in my generation I was under the impression that the history of the Church began the year I was born.[8] It never dawned on me that I should consider what other generations had said.[9]  But, I had begun in earnest to read the biographies of godly men.  I was on a search to understand the reason for their usefulness, and I had determined I would read as many as I could.  Early on I discovered that these were men of prayer.  Hours a day were set aside seeking the face of God.  Consequently, they had an intimacy with God that is mostly foreign to this generation of Christians.  Longing for that same intimacy, I began to pray more fervently. 

It was not long before I became troubled by one particular finding.  I had noticed that these men, without exception, kept the Sabbath.[10] 

The list - in no particular order - includes:

• Robert M. M'Cheyne, 
• Jonathan Edwards, 
• C.H. Spurgeon, 
• Hudson Taylor, 
• William Carey, 
• J.C. Ryle, 
• D.M. Lloyd-Jones, 
  
• John Knox, 
• William Tyndale, 
• John Wesley, 
• George Whitefield, 
• Howell Harris, 
• David Brainerd, 
• John Elias, 
• Andrew Fuller, 
• John Newton, 
• David Livingstone, 
• George Muller, 
• A.W. Pink, 
• Leonard Ravenhill,  
• Duncan Campbell, 
• the Puritans, 
• the Covenanters, 
• the leaders of the Great Awakening (some of whom have already been cited above), 
• the leaders of the Second Great Awakening, 
• the great theologians (John Calvin, Francis Turretin, Charles Hodge, R.L. Dabney, B.B. Warfield,  Augustus H. Strong, Herman Bavinck, Louis Berkhof, G. Vos, John Murray), 
• and most others in the days before the inroads of 19th century liberalism. 

They were Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian, Anglican, but on this they were virtually unanimous.  Perhaps more troubling was the discovery (as far as I could tell at the time) that every revival was marked by more careful Sabbath observance.[11]  

I had thought Sabbath keepers were legalists.  These men were anything but legalists!  I had thought Sabbath keeping  a burden.  These men seemed to cherish the day.  I wasn’t convinced, nor did I want to be convinced, but at least they had my attention.  I wondered, though, what their reasoning might be.  The arguments I had heard growing up were so obvious it seemed impossible to believe that they could keep the Sabbath for any other reason beside tradition.  And yet, reading their stories I could not believe they would do anything on the basis of tradition alone. So began the search to understand...

For part 2 go here

-----------------

[1] B.B. Warfield says, Now, the law of which our Lord makes this strong assertion of its ever-abiding validity, includes, ason one of its prominent constituent parts, just the Ten Commandments.  For, as he proceeds to illustrate his statements from instances in point, showing how the law is filled out, completed by him, he begins by adducing instances from the Ten Commandments… It is with the Ten Commandments clearly in his mind, therefore, that he declares that no jot or tittle of law shall ever pass away, but it all must be fulfilled.”  B.B. Warfield, Selected Shorter Writings, vol. 1 (), 314.

[2] Laws prohibiting homosexual relationship, specifically, are being classed (by some) among the laws requiring ritual cleansing.  They are ceremonial and therefore said to be abrogated.

[3] Under the older administration of the covenant of grace the Old Testament believers looked to the day when the Messiah would become a curse that they might be pardoned and adopted.  Those who believed on Him, like Abraham, were counted righteous and were no more under the curse of eternal death.  Nonetheless, to His Church God spoke of the promise of blessings for obedience and the real danger of curses for disobedience.  Believing Israelites were not cast out of fellowship with God for the sins of the Church, but they still endured the temporary and tragic consequences of that sin.  See Deuteronomy 28 and 1 Chronicles 36.14-21, for example.

[4] Andrew Woolsey, Channel of Revival (Edinburgh: The Faith Mission), 115

[5]When I say that I did not grow up in a Sabbath keeping home I do not, of course, mean that my family did not properly sanctify the Saturday.  Historically, Christians who have sought to honour the Sabbath have regarded the Sunday as the Christian Sabbath.  After all, the Sunday – which is given the name “Lord’s Day” in Scripture - is named after the One who called Himself Lord of the Sabbath.  The name itself indicates that a shift has been made from the 7^th to the 1^st day of the week.  Just as the name “Lord’s Supper” teaches believers that the meal is not ordinary but set apart for God, so the name “Lord’s Day” teaches believers that the day is not ordinary, but set apart for God.  Of course, we have more than the name.  We have the example of our Lord himself who appeared to his disciples on the first day of the week was absent and then appeared again on the following Sunday; and we have the example of the apostles and the early Church.         

[6]Perhaps the more devout would suggest that recreational activities should be put aside every day of the week so that we can spend those days worshipping.  In seasons of revival this is what they meant by a perpetual Sabbath.  To this I have no objection.  I long to see believers so gripped by love for Jesus that they haven’t the same desire to be at play.  Nevertheless, we need to work, which renders the theory a practical impossibility.  We simply cannot keep the Sabbath every day except by neglecting our God-given duty to provide for our families.

[7] We sometimes missed Sunday evening services because they weren’t always available, but our family never skipped church.  Though my father and I now disagree on the subject of the Sabbath, I admire him for his reverence for God, his commitment to rule of Scripture, and his determination to obey whatever the cost.

[8] Sinclair Ferguson was speaking offhand to a group of us who were in attendance one year at the Banner of Truth Conference.   

[9] Until he was gone I never knew that my father’s father, like his ancestors, had sought to honour the Sabbath being convinced (as I now am) that the Sabbath is a creation ordinance.

[10] Work and recreation were put aside, so that the day could be given to exercises of corporate and private worship.

[11] I have continued to study the history of revival and have yet to find an exception.