Turn your Bibles to Deuteronomy chapter 5. Deuteronomy chapter 5, we're considering the fourth commandment. Remember the Sabbath day or observe the Sabbath day to keep it holy. We've looked at the Sabbath in the Old Covenant, the Sabbath in the New Covenant, and tonight we're going to look at the alleged anti-Sabbatarian New Testament texts. Again, the anti-sabbatarian New Testament texts. Those texts, three of them, where persons say that these texts indicate there is no abiding Sabbath for the people of God. So that will be the focus, but I do want to read the Ten Commandments to get it in front of us. So beginning in chapter 5 at verse 6, 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. Observe the Sabbath day to keep it holy, as the Lord your God commanded you. 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 ox, nor your donkey, nor any of your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates, that your male servant and your female servant may rest as well as you. And remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the Lord your God brought you out from there by a mighty hand and by an outstretched arm. Therefore, the Lord your God commanded you to keep the Sabbath day. Honor your father and your mother as the Lord your God has commanded you, that your days may be long and that it may be well with you in 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 wife, and you shall not desire your neighbor's house, his field, his male servant, his female servant, his ox, his donkey, or anything that is your neighbor's. These words, the Lord spoke to all your assembly in the mountain from the midst of the fire, the cloud and the thick darkness with a loud voice. And he added no more. And he wrote them on two tablets of stone and gave them to me. Amen. Well, let us pray. Father, thank you for your written word. Thank you for the law of God. Help us to use it lawfully, to use it correctly, to use it the way it's specified in Holy Scripture. And grant us grace and aid now as we consider this fourth commandment. Help us to call the Sabbath a delight. Help us to see it as the best of the days and help us to rejoice in it. The privilege that is ours to gather in together and to worship our great God and to Take up the day in reading and prayer and fellowship and those things that are so blessed by the Lord. Do forgive us now for our sin and our transgression, and again, fill us with your Holy Spirit as we move through your Word. And we ask in Jesus' name, Amen. As I said, we did a brief exposition of the commandment in its original setting, and then we did a biblical theology of the Sabbath. And basically, in the Old Testament, we looked at Genesis 2, verses 1 to 3. It is a creation ordinance. God, Sabbath, and as He sabbathed, He gave example for His creatures to follow. We saw Cain and Abel worship at the end of days, in the process of time. Ultimately, we identified that as the one day out of the seven in which they were to bring sacrifice before the Lord. We saw in Exodus 16, there was a Sabbath for the people of Israel even prior to the giving of the law in Exodus 20. We did see Exodus 20 in Deuteronomy 5, the giving of the law at Sinai, codification of that moral law that God wrote on the heart of Adam. We then move to the prophet Isaiah in chapter 56, the passage that I read at the outset of worship, where we see that new covenant blessing, including the eunuchs into the very house of God, is also accompanied by Sabbath and the Gentiles coming into the house of the Lord. We saw the abuse of Sabbatarianism in Isaiah 58, and at the end we see that exhortation to call the Sabbath a delight. And then we looked at Jeremiah 31, 31 to 34, which is basically God's promise that in the New Covenant era, He would write the law of God on the hearts of His people. New Covenant saints are forgiven of their sins, they know the Lord, and they have the law of God written in their hearts, wherein they want to do what the Lord has commanded them. We then moved into the New Testament, and from there we saw the ministry of Jesus Christ, specifically with reference to his view of the law, Matthew 5, 17-20, and then his view of the Sabbath, Matthew 12, verses 1-14. From there we saw the resurrection of Christ. It was on the first day of the week. and that is significant in redemptive history. We then move to the teaching of the Apostles, where we consider the change of the day in Hebrews chapter 4, where we see that there is a Sabbath rest that remains for the people of God. The theology of Sabbath there is clearly articulated by the Apostle. Verse 10 is what I tried to argue that that is the day change, or the text that legitimizes the day change. Christ entered into His rest. the way the Father did at the beginning in the creation of the world. Then we looked at the worship at Troas in Acts 20, verse 7, on the first day of the week, the collection for the saints in 1 Corinthians 16, 1 and 2, and then John in the Spirit on the Lord's Day in Revelation 1, verse 10. And as I said, there are alleged anti-sabbatarian New Testament texts, and that's what's going to occupy us tonight. Romans 14, Galatians 4, and Colossians 2. So we'll turn first of all to Romans 14. The argument being that these three passages show that there is no special day among the people of God. Every day is the day of worship. Every day is a day given unto God. Every day ought to be special in the lives of God's people. Well, the faultiness of that argument is that if everything is special, then nothing is. Date night is wonderful because not every night is date night. God has given us a particular day in which we get to gather together in the presence of God and we get to Sabbath, we get to rest in Him, we get to call it a delight, we get to know His blessing and His sanctifying power in our lives through the means of grace. But some, as I said, want to relegate this doctrine of the Christian Sabbath as a Puritan invention, or as an act of legalism, or as a means whereby persons are binding the consciences of others without biblical warrant. Well, hopefully, the data that we have surveyed indicates that that's not the case. And hopefully, as we look at these particular passages, we will see that's not the case. The Christian Sabbath abides, the Christian Sabbath is blessed of God, and the Christian Sabbath must be practiced by the people of God. Again, not as a means for our justification or salvation, but as a fruit of us having been justified freely by grace. The people of God, freed from the bondage of the law, by the redemptive work of Jesus Christ are then pointed by Jesus Christ back to the law, not as a form of bondage, but as a pattern of sanctification, as an instruction on how to live before God in a manner that is consistent with who he is and what he requires from men. But in Romans chapter 14, notice specifically what we've got going on. It's a discussion by the apostle Paul on matters concerning Christian liberty. Verse 1 tells us, 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. 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, who are you to judge another's servant? To his own master, he stands or falls. Indeed, he will be made to stand, for God is able to make him stand. The context has to do with Christian liberty. The apostle Paul wants the people of God, whether they're weak or whether they're strong, to be able to live in harmony. He gives the particular temptations or tendencies involved with being either a weaker brother or a stronger brother with reference to not living in peace. Notice. Verse 2, one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables. So the stronger brother thinks and believes that he can eat meat. The weaker brother thinks he can only eat vegetables. And I don't think this is first and foremost matters of nutrition and value in terms of nutrient count. I think it has to do with Jewish food laws. And that with the coming of Jesus Christ, those Jewish food laws are abrogated because what they stood for, the typological significance, are fulfilled by Jesus Christ. But coming into this new covenant era, a man who had never eaten bacon, a man who had never eaten shrimp, perhaps doesn't want to eat bacon or shrimp. Perhaps his conscience is still affected in the sense that it's wrong for him to do so. He's identified there as a weaker brother because he hasn't appreciated fully the reality that Christ has come and freed him from those particular demands. Well, the stronger brother has understood, and so the stronger brother does eat bacon. He does eat shrimp. He enjoys these particular things. So Paul highlights the particular temptations that are there with reference to the weaker and the stronger. Notice in verse 3, let not him who eats despise him who does not eat. In other words, the stronger brother is not to look down upon the weaker brother. He's not to invite him over on a particular occasion where he's having bacon and where he's having shrimp. And he's passing it in front of that weak brother and he's sort of despising. He's putting him down. He's looking down upon him and suggesting. You know, you need to embrace your liberty and you need to suck it up and you need to enjoy the good gifts that God has given. Don't do that. If you're a stronger brother and you're going to offend a weaker brother, don't do it. That's how the chapter ends. Don't exercise your liberty at the expense of the conscience of a weaker brother. But it's not just the strong that has a tendency or a temptation to do something wrong or contrapiece with reference to the weaker brother. Notice what he says in 3b. And let not him who does not eat judge him who eats. So that's the tendency on the part of the weaker brother. The weaker brother supposes that this allegedly strong brother is in sin. He's in rebellion. He shouldn't eat those particular things. If he knew better, he wouldn't do that. Paul's point is that he wants peace and he wants harmony and he wants unity among the people of God. He doesn't want there to be factions. The strong brethren, they meet at one table and they mow down on meat. And the weak brethren, they gather together at the wheat table and they just eat vegetables. Whatever floats your boat in terms of what you want to eat, that's up to you ultimately. We are not to judge one another and we are not to despise persons. He goes on from meats and drinks to dates. Notice in 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. Essentially what I think is happening here is that if it is the case that we can do something that is a Jewish calendar practice without sort of putting a theological spin on it, then it's okay to do that. There were several feast days within the nation of Israel. Jewish calendar had more than just the weekly Sabbath. In fact, that's not what's in view here at all. It is those feast days. So Paul says, if some want to observe those particular days, but again, they don't attach theological significance to it in the sense that God is now going to accept me because I kept this particular feast. No, there's culture, there's practice, there's ethnicity. There's an instance where the apostle Paul takes Timothy and has him circumcised because they're going to go into Jewish regions. We know that circumcision doesn't matter in terms of religion in the New Covenant era, but it would have been an offense to the Jewish audience, so Paul has Timothy circumcised. That was not a matter of obeying the law of Moses in order to be accepted by God. It was a matter of trying to keep peace with Jews, with reference to young Timothy. So if we can do these things without attaching significance to them in terms of our acceptance with God, then if some want to observe these particular days, that's up to them. If others don't want to observe those particular days, that's up to them as well. We're not to bind consciences. We're not to go beyond the scripture. But as well, we're not supposed to bind the other way and say, well, just because Jesus came doesn't mean we're no longer obligated to keep these ceremonies and feasts. Well, of course it means that. Christ fulfilled all that the ceremonies typify. He is the anti-type. So we're not to be brought back under that, but if somebody from an ethnic or a cultural point of view wants to celebrate that day, Paul says, that's okay, go right ahead. But then he moves his discussion back solely to eating and to drinking. And again, dropping down at the very end of the chapter, he lays down that most important principle that if your liberty offends a brother for whom Jesus died, then don't exercise that liberty. Don't parade it in front of them. Don't make them uncomfortable or squeamish, but rather show respect, show love, and try to endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. The Christian Sabbath is not in view in this particular passage. It's not the Christian Lord's Day, rather Jewish feast days observed for ethnic or cultural reasons. The apostles' concern, and it ought to be our concern as well, is that observers of these days don't bind the consciences of those who don't observe them. William Ames makes this comment. He says, the apostle in Romans 14 expressly speaks of the judgment about certain days, which then produce defense among Christians. But the observance of the Lord's day, which the apostle himself teaches, had already taken place in all the churches. Remember 1 Corinthians 16, 1 and 2? That's already binding. That's already in play. That's already in place. So he would not teach, I want you to lay up collection on the first day of the week, simply to come along and say, well, there's no real significance to the first day of the week. Well, what do you mean, Paul? You've already told us that we're to gather together and we're to bring those collections. In fact, he goes on, Ames does, to say this, it is most probable that the apostle in this passage is treating of a dispute about the choosing of days to eat or refuse certain meats. This point is that days isn't the issue at all in Romans chapter 4. And if that's the case, it's certainly not the Christian Sabbath, but it's these days upon which persons would eat these particular meats or not. He says, 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 in the remainder of the chapter, he considers only meats, making no mention of days. So what we have in Romans 14 is the reality that there was a transition period. And we're going to meet that in our study in the book of Acts. When we get to Acts chapter 15, there is an overarching concern that affects the church that they have to deal with. And that overarching concern that affects the church that they have to deal with is Gentile inclusion in the promises of Almighty God. So these Gentiles have now come in and the Jews are saying, wait a minute, we all had to be circumcised, we all had to abstain from certain things, we all had to obey a certain calendar observance with reference to our life as Israelites. The Gentiles have to as well. Well, no, that's not how they ruled there at Acts 15 in the Jerusalem Council. But you see this tension continue even all the way up to chapter 21. When Paul returns to Jerusalem with money to give to Pastor James, sort of the leader of the church in Jerusalem, James says, persons out there are being shaken because they think you're teaching no obedience to the law of Moses. And so what James suggests is that Paul obey a particular calendar observance and Paul complies. Paul does not comply for religious reasons in the sense of acceptance with God. Paul complies to make sure there's unity among Jews and Gentiles. So when we get to Romans 14, the argument isn't everyday special, we don't need a Sunday Sabbath because every day is alike. That's not the point. The point is that some were still holding, whether culturally or ethnically, to these particular observances, and if they did that, then Paul said, leave them alone as long as they don't judge other people. And with reference to meats and drinks and those sorts of things, again, the principle is the strong mustn't despise the weak, and the weak must not judge the strong. And I just want to read the last section before we move to the next text, because I think it is most important. Notice in verse 14, I know and I'm convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing. Well, prior to that, Paul's point basically is we stand before the Lord. I think this is a great place for us to stand. We're not going to ultimately be judged by each other. We're going to be judged by the Lord. If a man has a clear conscience before God, most high. and he is willing and able to engage in a particular activity, asking the Lord's blessing, then it is not up to you to deter him or stop him. We are not supposed to be legalistic. We are not supposed to be Pharisaic. We are not supposed to impose our preferences upon others. We are to respect the reality that each of us will stand before the Lord God. Now again, that's in things indifferent. Those are in things that are matters of Christian liberty, not with reference to the moral law of God. If somebody is committing adultery, reprove them, rebuke them. But if somebody eats bacon, leave them alone is what Paul is saying in this section. Now verse 14, I know and I'm convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself, but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. And herein lies the problem, at least to some degree. You need to educate yourself. You need to understand your conscience needs to be informed, not by preference, not by the prevailing winds around us, but by God's holy word. That's what's supposed to shape and frame and dictate what our conscience allows us to do. There are those who have this mindset that something is unclean. Paul's point is, well then don't put it in front of their face. But I think Paul would want them to move from the place to adopt the position that he himself has just said. Verse 14, I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself. That's the goal, that's maturation, that's strength in the Christian life, and that's what the apostle wants for the people of God. Verse 15, yet if your brother is grieved because of your food, you are no longer walking in love. Do not destroy with your food the one for whom Christ died. Therefore, do not let your good be spoken of as evil. For the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. For he who serves Christ in these things is acceptable to God and approved by men. Therefore, let us pursue the things which make for peace and the things by which one may edify another. Irrespective of our studies in the Decalogue, irrespective of our studies with reference to the Fourth Commandment, brethren, these are foundational principles for church life. If we cannot get along together on this side of heaven, if we can't jive with one another, even in spite of some legitimate differences, in spite of some legitimate preferences, then we are wrong. We've got problems. The Church of Jesus Christ is supposed to be a body of people, according to Ephesians 4, that endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. Why do you think that emphasis? Because Paul knew good and well that problems in the body affect the proclamation of the truth. Problems in the body affect the bringing of glory to God. Problems in the body ought to be dealt with. We ought to deal with one another in such a way that when we go to God, it's not the case that we've got all this baggage. The apostle lays down principles for us as God's people to be able to get along with one another. Verse 20, do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All things indeed are pure, but it is evil for the man who eats with offense. It is good neither to eat meat, nor drink wine, nor do anything by which your brother stumbles, or is offended, or is made weak. Do you have faith? Have it to yourself before God. Happy is he who does not condemn himself in what he approves, but he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because he does not eat from faith, for whatever is not from faith is sin. You see what you're doing if you're a strong brother and you've got the weak brother over and you're serving bacon and you say, just go ahead, just eat it, just eat it, just eat it. Well, for him, it's said because it's not a faith. He thinks it's wrong. Now, we might say, well, he needs to be smarter. He needs to grow. He needs to get mature. but he's not right now, so don't offend him and don't cause him to stumble by putting him into a situation that for him is sin. Now, Paul doesn't just confine his comments here. He takes them all the way into Corinth in chapters 8 to 10 in 1 Corinthians. There it's meat offered up to idols. When you go to somebody's house, don't ask questions. If it's gonna bug you that the thought that this meat was offered up to idols, don't ask. Don't ask, because if they tell you, yeah, it was offered up to idols, then you're going to be problematic and you're not going to eat. Paul has rules guiding us in 1 Corinthians 8 to 10 along the same line, but ultimately his argument is grounded in that same principle. We are not to cause brethren to stumble in matters of Christian liberty. Cause them to stumble if they are transgressing the moral law of God. Cause them to stumble if they are questioning the doctrine of justification by faith alone. And I don't mean push them, I mean cause them a little bit of discomfort with reference to the doctrine of Trinity. If they are questioning that or doubting that, oh, by all means, offend them with the truth as it is in Jesus. But when it comes to matters of indifference, leave people alone. I know that's tough. I've seen it for 22 years that it's tough. I have seen it manifested in myself and not anybody here particularly, so don't thank Izzy after me. No, but the bottom line is that Charles Hodge was absolutely, positively right. Every man has a pope in his own bosom. That is the tendency to judge others. We need to guard against that. Romans 14 is about that. not about the abrogation of the Decalogical Sabbath, the Deuteronomy 5, Exodus 20 Sabbath that we have spent time looking at in the Old Testament and in the New Testament. That's not the point of the passage. The point of the passage is love one another, be kind to one another, and promote peace within the context of the church. Now turn over to Galatians 4. Galatians chapter 4. After highlighting the glory of the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, in chapter 4, verses 1 to 7, He then comes to reprove those persons in the churches of Galatia that have given ear to the Judaizers. Remember that as we consider verses 9 and 10 in this reference to days, it's still in the context of the book of Galatians. What's the overarching concern of the Apostle in the book of Galatians? It's Judaizers, those who came to the churches of Southern Galatia on the heels of the Apostle Paul, and they said, faith in Jesus is good, but you must also be circumcised. Paul condemns that in chapter 5 at verse 2. But as well, they said, not only circumcision, but the Jewish calendar. You have to abide by that. Now again, what's in view in verses 9 and 10 isn't the Christian Sabbath at all, but rather it is an attempt on the part of man to supplement his faith in Christ with certain aspects of Jewish law in order to commend himself to God Almighty. Can I just say that if you have a proper biblical understanding of the Christian Sabbath, and you think that abiding by that Sabbath and keeping that day holy somehow makes you fit for heaven, then that deserves the same reproof. In other words, we don't keep the Sabbath day in order to be justified. We keep the Sabbath day because we have been justified. This is the context in Galatians. It is circumcision, and it is the Jewish calendar, and that's what Paul is condemning. Notice in verse 8, but then indeed, when you did not know God, you served those which by nature are not gods. But now after you have known God, or rather are known by God, how is it that you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements to which you desire again to be in bondage? If we understand the Christian Sabbath, we can't for a moment entertain that that's what he's thinking. The picture presented of God's Sabbathing, the enthronement of our Lord, on Genesis chapter 2, is that bondage? We get to Cain and Abel at the end of days, on that day of worship, bringing their sacrifice to God, is that bondage? We get to Exodus chapter 16 and the people of God, the people of the Old Covenant community, obeying Sabbath commandment. Is that bondage? We get to Exodus chapter 20. What is Sabbath representative in Exodus chapter 20? It's representative or it's grounded in the creative power of God. In Deuteronomy chapter 5, it's rooted in the redemptive power of God. That's not bondage. We get to the prophet Isaiah, chapter 56, and Sabbath tippei is connected with eunuchs entering in to the new covenant, to the house of God Almighty. That's not bondage. Isaiah 58, call the Sabbath day a bondage. No, it's a day of delight. Matthew chapter 12, does our Lord Jesus treat the Sabbath as a day of bondage? No, that's not it at all. So whatever Paul is speaking about, he is not speaking about a good command of God as being a bad thing. John the Apostle tells us the commandments of God are not grievous, they're not burdensome, they're not something that we go, oh man, I can't believe God actually wants me to rest. God actually wants me to be happy. God actually wants me to be joyful. How dare God ever do such a thing like that? Unfortunately, that's the attitude at times we express with reference to commandment keeping. And again, want to qualify it, we don't commandment keep in order to be saved. We commandment keep as an aspect of our sanctification for us having been justified freely by His grace. Or consider Jesus in Mark chapter 2. What does He say there? The Sabbath was made for man. Not Israel, not the Jews, certainly Israel and the Jew included in that, but he's speaking most likely about Adam. The Sabbath was made for the man or mankind in general. It's not the case that it's bad. It's the case that it's most excellent and God has given it to his people for their wellbeing. And then verse 10, you observe days and months and seasons and years. I am afraid for you, lest I have labored for you in vain. Now, the problem Paul is addressing is the Judaizing of believers in Christ. The point in verses 8 to 10 is that we cannot look to days of observance as a means of acceptance with God. Turn over to Galatians 5, 2. Galatians 5, well, verse 1, Again, there's a fundamental difference between what he's stating here and what he does with Timothy. In Acts 16, he has Timothy circumcised. Either Paul is absolutely contradictory, or in the one case, he's not circumcising Timothy with any religious significance attached. But with reference to this condemnation, he is saying, telling them, that if you get circumcised as a means by which God will accept you, then Christ will profit you nothing. Why? Because of Galatians 2.21, I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness comes to the law, then Christ died in vain. Notice what he says, if you choose law keeping, this goes with that Fisher quote that I read this morning, if you choose law keeping, look what it obligates you to in verse three. And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised, that he is a debtor to keep the whole law. See, there's one of two approaches to God, either you and your perfection or Christ and his perfection. The book of Galatians condemns the attempt to try and mingle the two, because when we try and mingle the two, we take away from the glory of Jesus Christ. We are Judaizing. We are adding works. We are suggesting that what Christ wrought out for us in our salvation wasn't complete, and we need to supplement it. In many respects, Galatians is a book basically telling you no supplements whatsoever with reference to the Christian faith. So back to Galatians 4, verse 10. Likely, again, it's the Jewish calendar, and it's not the Christian Sabbath at all. Ames says in the Galatians passage, the discussion relates only to the observance of days, months, and years as an aspect of bondage to weak and beggarly elements. But it was far from the apostles' mind and altogether strange to Christian faith to consider any commandment of the Decalogue, any one of the Ten Commandments, or any ordinance of Christ in such a vein. You would never treat those commandments as if it was bondage. None of us ever say, oh man, that sixth commandment, what bondage? I just really want to go out and kill people. That would make me happy. It's bondage that God says or prohibits me from killing. No, we wouldn't do that. Well, the same as truer obtains. with reference to the Fourth Commandment. It's not an act of bondage. The Apostle condemns this particular practice because, like circumcision, they attach religious significance to it and suppose that it brought them acceptance by God. Another commentator said, the issue then is not the observance of religious usages as such, but the basis of the justification before God. The legalistic approach advocated by the Galatian agitators and the gospel of free grace proclaimed by Paul are irreconcilably opposed to each other. And I'll say it again. If you, as somebody who's heard the doctrine of the Christian Sabbath and appreciates what we see beginning in Genesis chapter 2 that moves all the way to Revelation chapter 1 verse 10, you say, yeah, I see it. I see that biblical theology of the Christian Sabbath. I see that it's binding. I see that it's perpetual. I see that it's moral. And I'm going to keep it so that God will save me. If that's your disposition, you are absolutely positively wrong in your approach to the Christian Sabbath. That's what Paul is doing, but not with the Christian Sabbath, with the Jewish calendar, just like circumcision was a sort of identifying badge of national identity with reference to life in Israel. Let's move to the third and final passage in Colossians 2. Colossians chapter 2. Now, the sort of thing that was facing the church in Colossae was a bit Judaizing, but it was also a bit odder, too. It was a sort of mingling together, a mixing of angels and Judaism and Christ. And the Apostle Paul doesn't want them to go down that road. The Apostle Paul wants people to be consumed and obsessed with Christ, not with angels and not with Judaism and not with the sorts of things that men want to put you into bondage with. And with reference to Colossians chapter 2, in this particular area, He is issuing cautions and warnings. Notice in verse 8, he says, Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit. Now before you say, I can't ever study philosophy, that's not what Paul's talking about. That's not what Paul is saying. Paul is saying something that is secularistic or humanistic or is contrary to Jesus Christ ought to be shunned. Now, there might be a time and a season and occasion where you should study that if you're an apologist. If you're going to debate somebody that holds a particular philosophical view, Paul is not against you reading up on it so that you can clean that man's clock and debate. The idea is, is don't be led astray to God-hating, rebellious philosophy. That's the issue. Philosophy simply means lover of wisdom. Every one of us should be a philosopher. Paul tells us that in Christ all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hid. Christians ought to be the best philosophers because we have the very object of philosophy, our Lord Jesus. But it's a prohibition against God-hating, rebellious philosophy. So beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit. according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ. For in him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, and you are complete in him who is the head of all principality and power." And then notice in verse 16, he issues another caution. He says, so let no one judge you in food or in drink or regarding a festival or a new moon or Sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substances of Christ. So verse 16 is sort of the overarching concern of the apostle in this section. He does not want persons to judge you. By that he means don't fall prey to their pressure, don't fall prey to their bullying, don't fall prey to their attempt at manipulation. And then he gives two concrete examples of what these persons will do. In this immediate section he's dealing with what's called mystical legalism. Mystical legalism. There's a mysticism wrapped up in it, but it's legalistic in essence. You need to do the Jewish calendar in order to be accepted by God. Similar to what we see there in Galatians chapter 4. And then in verses 20 and following, he condemns an emphasis on what's called asceticism. And asceticism is simply a withdrawal from society in the sense that we don't eat, we don't taste, we don't touch, we don't handle. Well, that ultimately or essentially reduces to will worship. And so in 216 and following, there are cautions against mystical legalism and then this asceticism. Again, those things on their face are bad. If somebody came in here and said, oh, I'm going to preach and I want to tell all of you that you need to obey the Jewish calendar and you can't eat bacon. We would know that's bad. We would know that's wrong. I hope we would. Yeah, could you all give me a nod? We would know that's bad, right? And if somebody said you can't touch, you can't taste, you can't see, you have to be in a setting. Monkery is the way to heaven. We would know that's wrong. That is not the case. Paul attaches that abstinence from marriage and abstinence from meat to the doctrine of demons in 1 Timothy chapter 4. It's not right. So on the very surface of it, we know that something is up. He's dealing with heretics. He's dealing with distorters of truth. He is dealing with persons who want to try to bind the consciences of these professing Christians in Colossae and add to them things on top of faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. So you see, food and days. That's the emphasis in verse 16. Let no one judge you in food or in drink or regarding a festival or a new moon or Sabbaths. And then verse 17 gives the rationale, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ. The Jewish calendar and the Jewish food laws served typologically for the people of Israel. When Jesus comes, he is the antitype. So there's no more food laws and there is no more Jewish calendar. But again, he's not dealing with the Christian Sabbath. He's already established that persons gathered together in 1 Corinthians 16 take up collection on that day. Acts 20, verse 7, his own pattern showed that where he was preaching. Remember, he continued his sermon late into the night and that young man, Eutychus, fell and died and was revived. The Apostle Paul already was observing the first day. John was in the Spirit on the Lord's Day. If you accept Pauline authorship of the book of Hebrews, he was the architect of the theology of the day change there in Hebrews chapter 4. Now, to go one step further, we know that this is ceremonial law, or aspects of positive law, specifically for the Old Covenant people. There are a few instances in the Old Testament where there are Sabbaths connected to new moons and festivals. These were not necessarily even on the seventh day. If you look at the book of Leviticus chapter 23, there are occasional Sabbaths that wouldn't necessarily even fall on the seventh day in Israel's calendar. And again, at several points in Old Testament scripture, these three terms are put together. In fact, let's go ahead and turn there just so you can see. He's not dealing with Exodus 20. He's not dealing with Deuteronomy 5. He is not dealing with the Decalogical Sabbath at all. He is not dealing with the Christian Lord's Day. He is dealing with these occasional Sabbaths that were adhered to in conjunction with these festivals and these new moons. So let's look at the several places where these three terms are used to show that this is not the Christian Sabbath that Paul is saying, let no one judge you concerning in Colossians 2. The first text is found in 1 Chronicles 23. 1 Chronicles 23. And in each of these contexts, it's conspicuously ceremonial law that's in view. Positive law attached to the old covenant in terms of their regulation. And if those terms confuse you, you can talk to me later about ceremonial and positive. But in 1 Chronicles 23, verse 31, And at every presentation of a burnt offering to the Lord on the sabbaths, and on the new moons, and on the set feasts, by number according to the ordinance, governing them regularly before the Lord. Turn to 2 Chronicles 2.3. 2 Chronicles 2.3. No detailed exegesis in each of these passages, because I just want to show that these three terms are used frequently in the Old Testament in conjunction, and it's separate from the weekly Sabbath. It's separate from the Deuteronomy 5, Exodus 20, Lord's Day, where the people of God came in from out of the world, entered into the very presence of God, and worshiped and rested and were sanctified and blessed. In 2.3 in 2 Chronicles, we see, Solomon sent to Hiram king of Tyre, saying, As you have dealt with David, my father, and sent him cedars to build himself a house to dwell in, so deal with me. Behold, I am building a temple for the name of the Lord my God, to dedicate it to him, to burn before him sweet incense for the continual showbread, for the burnt offerings morning and evening, on the Sabbaths, on the new moons, and on the set feasts of the Lord our God. This is an ordinance forever to Israel. And when it says forever, I know that makes people think, well, that must mean it's still for us now. There are contexts in the Old Testament where forever doesn't mean forever. It doesn't mean forever extending into our future. It meant forever as long as the Jewish polity was still extant, as long as the Old Covenant people were still together. It was forever. It was regulatory for them. But when that theocracy is dissolved by the Babylonians in the 6th century BC, and especially at AD 70, They are entering into the rank and file of all the other nations. They're no longer set apart as a special people of God. That doesn't mean we treat them poorly. It doesn't mean we promote anti-Semitism. It doesn't mean we bomb delis or anything like that. It simply means that at one point they were the very apple of God's eye. They violated the terms of the covenant. God brought judgment to bear upon them. And at AD 70, they entered into the rank and file of every other nation. So don't let that word necessarily throw you and cause you to think that we are still under the positive law attached to Old Covenant religion. 2 Chronicles 31.3. 2 Chronicles 31.3. And Hezekiah, verse 2, appointed the divisions of the priests and the Levites according to their divisions. Again, you see the ceremonial aspect? Guess what we don't have today? We don't have divisions of Levites. We don't have priests. We don't have all that stuff associated with Old Covenant worship. Old Covenant worship is abrogated through the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. I think I've shared with you that the church is more modeled after synagogue worship than temple worship. Synagogue worship didn't have sacrifice, didn't have incense, didn't have all that sort of thing. But that's what marked Old Covenant worship in the tabernacle and then temple. But those things were typological. They were for a period of time, until the time of Reformation, when Christ came. Not when Calvin came, but when Christ came. And at that point, that positive law, that aspect, is fulfilled by Jesus and therefore abrogated. Verse 2, Hezekiah appointed the divisions of the priests and the Levites according to their divisions, each man according to his service, the priests and Levites for burnt offerings and peace offerings to serve, to give thanks and to praise in the gates of the camp of the Lord. The king also appointed a portion of his possessions for the burnt offerings, for the morning and evening burnt offerings, the burnt offerings for the Sabbaths and the new moons and the set feasts, as it is written in the law of the Lord. You see those three terms? You think that's what Paul is speaking about in Colossians 2? You think that might be the case that the errorists were bringing? They were bringing the Jewish calendar, this fascination with angels, and they said to these saints in Colossae, you need to be mystical, you need to just let go and let Jesus, but as well, you need to obey the Jewish calendar. That's what's in view, that's what Paul is saying. Let no one judge you regarding positive or ceremonial law from the Old Testament. It's again referenced in Ezekiel 45, but one other text, I'm not trying to blow past the Ezekiel passage, it says exactly the same thing. But one other passage that's instructive in this vein is Hosea 2.11. The prophet Hosea 2.11. And this one is most intriguing because It is a pronouncement of God's judgment upon Israel. It's a pronouncement of God's judgment upon them for their having transgressed the terms of the covenant. This is God's law with reference to them that he is gonna suspend privilege. He never suspends, don't commit adultery. He never suspends, don't murder. He never suspends, don't covet. He never suspends, remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. He never suspends, have no other gods before me. He never suspends, you must not make for yourself an idol. He never suspends, or abrogates, you must not commit blasphemy. This is not the moral law of God relative to the one-day Sabbath that we see in Scripture. Notice in 2.11, well, verse 9, Therefore I will return and take away my grain in its time, and my new wine in its season, and will take back my wool and my linen, given to cover her nakedness. Now I will uncover her lewdness in the sight of her lovers, and no one shall deliver her from my hand. I will also cause all her mirth to cease, her feast days, her new moons, her Sabbaths, all her appointed feasts." See what he says? I will cause these things to cease. God never causes moral law to cease. God never says, it's okay now to disobey your parents. It's okay now to commit theft. It's okay now to commit perversion. He doesn't do that. This is ceremonial law that was designed ultimately for obsolescence. The Lord God most high had designed it that way. So when we go to Colossians chapter two and Paul says in verse 16, so let no one judge you in food or in drink or regarding a festival or a new moon or Sabbath, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substances of Christ, he's meaning God to be obvious to all of us. These were types under old covenant worship and now that the anti-type, Christ, has come, there is no longer a need for the type. When you have the substance, you don't need the shadow. I think I've shared the illustration before. Sometimes my kids will come over and they'll bring the grandkids, and I'm looking at the grandkids doing their grandkiddly things, just, you know, loving on them and watching them toddle or crawl or Now they're getting a little bigger and watching them get, you know, whatever they're doing. And then one of the kids will say, oh, look at this picture. No, I get to look at her right there. You can text me the picture later. I don't need the shadow. I've got the substance. See, that's what Paul is saying in this context. He's not saying there's no longer a Sabbath rest for the people of God. He says absolutely opposite in Hebrews 4.9. There remains, therefore, a Sabbath rest for the people of God. It's not typical of Jesus and his coming. It's typical of us. entering in to the fullness of that consummated rest and glory. It's a good thing. It's not bondage. So Paul's argument here is that the Jewish diet and the Jewish calendar were a shadow. Now that the substance has come, to be preoccupied with the shadow is to miss the substance. And that's not what you're supposed to do. You're supposed to be a lover of Jesus. Ames, again, says, in Colossians 2, the Sabbaths mentioned are specifically and expressly described as new moons and ceremonial shadows of things to come in Christ. But the Sabbath commanded in the Decalogue of our Lord and our Lord's day are of another nature entirely. It's an apples and oranges thing, worse than apples and oranges. Apples and oranges have more similarity because they're both round. But the moral law of the living God is unchangeable like the living God. But the ceremonial law or positive law attached to the Old Covenant people of God functioned as a type, functioned as a shadow. When the anti-type comes, the substance is present, we no longer go back to that diet and we no longer go back to that calendar. Gilfillan says, while moreover his words discard the days of Judaism, they touch not the authority of the ancient statue of paradise. And in undermining ceremonial rights, leave unshaken the moral foundation on which rests the prescription. Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. That's why Paul's preoccupation with and Paul's emphasis upon Jesus Christ in the book of Colossians. If persons come to the church and they say, Jewish diet, Jewish calendar, plus Jesus for salvation, no, we just preach Jesus. You see, it's by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. You are justified from all things which you could not be by the law of Moses. And yet these men had come to the church prescribing this act of obedience in conjunction with faith in Christ in order to be justified. It's not the Christian Sabbath at all. Well, in summary, or in conclusion, the Sabbath was instituted at creation, declared to Israel at Sinai, prophesied as having new covenant application in the prophet Isaiah and in Jeremiah 31. It is enforced by the Lord of Sabbath, practiced by the Apostolic Church on the first day of the week, according to the theology of the day change in Hebrews 4, as a result of or founded or grounded upon Christ's resurrection on the first day of the week. Our confession says, as it is the law of nature that in general, a proportion of time by God's appointment be set apart for the worship of God, so by his word in a positive moral and perpetual commandment, binding all men in all ages. He has particularly appointed one day in seven for a Sabbath to be kept holy unto him, which from the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ was the last day of the week. And from the resurrection of Christ was changed into the first day of the week, which is called the Lord's day, and is to be continued to the end of the world as the Christian Sabbath, the observation of the last day of the week being abolished. I think that is a great summary statement, and that's what I've attempted to try and demonstrate in terms of the theology of the Sabbath in the Old Covenant and in the New Covenant, dealing with these texts that are allegedly utilized, or not allegedly, they are utilized as being alleged passages that are contra New Testament Sabbatarianism. Now, with reference to obedience on the Fourth Commandment, there's something called casuistry. I'll give you the dictionary.com definition of casuistry. It is the application of general ethical principles to particular cases of conscience or conduct. So we get this doctrine of the fourth commandment down, and then we say, can I go to Tim Hortons? Can I do this? Can I do that? Can I go here? Can I go there? Well, let me just encourage you that we ought to look at Sabbath-keeping first and foremost as a positive blessing and gift from God. In other words, we are given privilege by our Lord to cease from our earthly labors, to come in from out of the world into the house of God to fellowship with fellow saints in Zion to the praise and the glory and the honor of God. We get a day to cease from our ordinary regular labors so that we can be occupied in and with the things of God Almighty. Instead of looking at it with all the negatives, well, I can't, and I can't, and I can't, and I can't, and I can't, and I can't, look at all the positives. We get to go to church three times at our church, if you go to the Prayer Meeting Confession Study, and morning and evening. We get to have people over. We get to talk about the Lord. We get to encourage people in the things of God Most High. We get to listen to sermons. These are privileges and blessings that obtain as a result of Sabbath keeping. Now, in terms of casuistry, we need to be careful that we don't fall prey to Pharisaism or to legalism. In my experience, and take this for what it's worth, oftentimes the people of God adopt a particular posture for their Lord's Day. And if others don't adopt that particular posture for their Lord's Day, then they are somehow wretched or they are somehow not as sanctified as we'd like for them to be. There's an example in a book written on the Sabbath. It's called, Call the Sabbath a Delight. And the fellow gives an instance of casuistry. How do we apply the general overarching concern or demand of the fourth word with reference to specific cases of conscience? You have one family, and the boy says, Daddy, can we ride our bikes today? And the father says, no, it's the Sabbath day. We're not going to ride our bikes. So they sit on the couch, and lo and behold, a family from the church rides their bikes right out in front of their bay window. And of course, that causes a great deal of concern among the family that has been prohibited from riding bikes. Well, what we don't know from that little tidbit, and what family A sitting and watching, and perhaps judging at this point does not know, is that they're writing to the part so they can sit under a tree and read catechism, or read Calvin, or read John Gill to their three-year-olds. You don't know what is happening in that particular instance. When it comes to Sabbath keeping, the multiplication of particular preferences is what really happened with reference to Pharisaism. So I'm not suggesting license. I am not suggesting any sort of a loosey-goosey response to the Sabbath. But I am suggesting get the doctrine down. Understand what God's Word says. If you have some questions about any of the sermons that have been preached, email me. I will send you the notes. you can reflect upon the text yourself, but once the doctrine is down, I think that goes a long way to helping in terms of the concrete application, in terms of the what can we, what should we, and what are we not supposed to do. So, there's my casuistry. And certainly some of you are going to say, but can we go to Tim Hortons? In terms of some questions for anti-Sabbatarians, I had mentioned I wanted to just set this forth. It's typical, and as I said, it's only in the Reformed churches that there is a Sabbath. It's only in the Reformed churches that we affirm the perpetuity of the... I guess outside of the Reformed churches, there might be that person, that duck out there, but for the most part, it's Reformed. And the reason why is because we have a view of covenant theology. And because we have a view of covenant theology, that yields a particular position on the law of God. And having that view of the law of God, we see the integrity and the utility of all ten commandments. Not nine of the ten commandments, but all ten of the commandments. Notice at the end of the reading in Deuteronomy chapter 5, he wrote these words, or the words were written by the finger of God. Ceremonial law is never said to be that way in the Old Testament. The decalogue or the moral law of God is the only body or division of the law that is ever said to be written by the finger of God. That doesn't mean that ceremonial and judicial was hatched in the mind of Moses. I'm not suggesting that it was given by revelation of God through Moses. but the significance of the moral law is underscored by the reality that it was written by the finger of God. And it's at this point that it's the sabbatarian or the person that affirms the perpetuity of the fourth commandment that's always put on the defensive, that's always put on the position, well, you've got to defend yourself. You know, I've sought to give a defense of it. But I think non-Sabbatarians have some work to do as well. Why does God establish a six-in-one pattern? Why does the creation week reflect specifically what the Sabbath is concerned with? Why does Sabbath observance predate Sinai? In other words, it's not only God's Sabbath in Genesis 2, 1 to 3, but it's Cain and Abel in Genesis 4, and it's Israel in Exodus 16, prior to the giving of the law in Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5. Well, Exodus 20 specifically. Why does God at Sinai tell them to remember the Sabbath? Isn't that an odd one? In our text, in Deuteronomy 5, it comes out as, observe the Sabbath day to keep it holy. But in the Exodus parallel, it's remember the Sabbath day. Doesn't that argue for a pre-Sinai appointment of the Sabbath day for Israel? Why does God refer to both creation and redemption in the giving of the Sabbath law in Exodus 20, Deuteronomy 5, and then those twin concepts emerge again in Hebrews 4 when he argues with reference to the theology of the day change. Why does Isaiah speak of Sabbath-keeping during the Messianic age? Isaiah 56 is a prophecy concerning the New Covenant Church. It is demonstrable from Acts 8 and the conversion and the baptism of the Ethiopian eunuch. Why does Jesus claim lordship of the Sabbath in Mark chapter 2? Again, all of this stuff doesn't necessarily say that everything I've said is absolutely positively true, but what I am suggesting is that persons who neglect this, persons who suggest it's no longer perpetual, persons who say it's no longer binding, have in essence adopted antinomianism. Antinomianism is bad too. If they can bandy about the term legalism for those of us who see a perpetual Sabbath keeping, then we can certainly apply antinomianism to them when they take one of the Ten Commandments and say, nah, it's not for us today. I don't think that's a legitimate step in a hermeneutical trajectory. Why does Jesus say that the Sabbath was made for man? Again, that's either Adam specifically or mankind generically, instead of saying it was made for Israel. It wasn't made for Israel. It was, but it was made for man, and Israel receives it at Sinai. Why would Jesus clear away the Jewish corruptions only to destroy it not long after? Why does the early church worship on the first day of the week, the day Christ rose from the dead? Why does the integrity of the Ten Commandments suffer in the New Covenant? In other words, how do we justify, hermeneutically, that excision of one of the Ten Commandments? If that's the case, then why not the other nine? Now, I know that people do do that. I know there's a class of people out there that say that the Ten Commandments have no abiding influence for any Christian whatsoever. That's genuine antinomianism, which, by the way, means anti-lawism. And then why does the author of Hebrews emphatically assert that a Sabbath rest remains for the people of God? Now again, it does not do to put it into the eschaton, because on the heels of the day change text in Hebrews 4.10, we then are exhorted in verse 11 to let us strive to enter that rest. God, in His grace and goodness, gave us the Christian Sabbath, or the Lord's Day, as the Puritans described it, as the market day of the soul. It is a time for the people of God to worship and fellowship together as the people of God, to sing the songs of Zion to our great Lord, and to bask in the reality that Christ in the gospel has saved us from our sins, that He set apart that first day, marking it out by his own resurrection from the dead. We see the apostles abide by that, we see John call it the Lord's Day, and the early church early on towed that line. They saw the first day of the week as the Lord's Day, as that time peculiarly set apart by God for the worship of God. And then finally, know this, that the Sabbath is like all the other nine commandments. The Sabbath is like all the other nine commandments. Do you always not covet? You don't even need to nod your head or say, yeah, me, no. The covet command gets us all. I don't care how holy you think you are. I don't care how righteous you think you are. One of those other nine finds you out. The point is, brethren, when you read our confession of faith on Sabbath keeping, it's a very high standard. If you ask those divines, do you think that persons 24 hours think nothing else than God? They'd say, oh no, we got remaining corruption. There's Galatians 5 and Romans 7. But when they propound the means of Sabbath keeping, they aim high. You'd never write a comment on the seventh commandment and say, well, you know, just have adultery once or twice a week. No, never ever commit it. My point is, is that with Sabbatarianism, there is still going to be sin. And it's in this that we rejoice in the Savior for sinners. We rejoice in the reality that Christ is our substitutionary Sabbath keeper. Now, we don't say, well, therefore, I don't have to keep the Sabbath, which is employed by some. No, but we thank God most high that when it comes to the law of God, An improper use is to seek justification from our God. Justification comes by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. We certainly aim high in our Sabbatarianism, but after the day, and we reflect upon it, and we see that for eight minutes we didn't think God's thoughts after Him, we ask the Lord to forgive us and to cleanse us in the precious blood of Jesus Christ. knowing that Christ and the gospel has brought redemption for even persons that do not perfectly keep and obey the Sabbath. Again, I'm not saying or suggesting, license, go do whatever it is you want to do. But brethren, it is one of the ten. And with reference to Altan, we stumble, we have issues, we have problems. We are prone to wander, prone to leave the God that we love. The flesh lusts against the spirit, the spirit against the flesh. These two are contrary to one another, so that you don't do the things that you wish, according to Galatians 5.17. Paul in Romans chapter 7, the good that I want to do, I don't do, and the evil I don't want to do, I find myself doing. So my encouragement is to keep the Sabbath, obey the Sabbath, observe the Sabbath, keep it holy. When we do sin, confess your sins and trust in that mercy of God Most High to forgive us and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. Well, let's close in a word of prayer. Father, thank you for your grace and thank you for this gift of Sabbath. You are a God who gives us, commands us to rest, a God who commands us to come in from out of the world and to enjoy the special presence of our great God. We see that in Ephesians chapter two, that we have access to the Father through the Son and the power of the Holy Spirit. And we know this takes place in a special way when we gather together as the people of God on the Lord's day. May we see this as special and may we relish it. May we cherish it. May we say with David in Psalm 122, I was glad when they said unto me, let us go to the house of the Lord. We thank you for your word. We thank you for your gospel. We thank you for your law and help us to use it lawfully and help us to bring glory to you. Go with us now and watch over us in this coming week. Grant us grace to glorify and to honor you. And we pray through Jesus Christ the Lord. Amen.