The Lord's Day: Does God Have to Repeat Himself?

The first objection I heard to a Reformed lesson on the Christian Sabbath/The Lord's Day was, "Y'know, the 4^th commandment is the only one of the Ten Commandments not repeated in the New Testament." I've heard it too many times to count in the 9.5 years since. And of all the objections to the observance of the Day of Rest that I encounter, this is the...well, can't think of a polite way to say this, it's the lamest. It's also very odd that this is generally spouted by the same people that are generally pretty worked up about the posting (or lack thereof) of all 10 in public buildings. Wouldn't it be more consistent for them to slip an ellipsis in between "in vain" and "V. Honor" (maybe ellipses don't look good in marble?)? But I digress...

[sidebar: this is why I love the informal nature of blogs, I don't have to run to my thesaurus to come up with a nice way of saying that idea is vacuous and foundationless. I can just call it lame--and I can ramble at will :) ]

I have a two-fold, un-scholarly response to this "objection." There are probably more that could be given, but these work for me.

1. So what? How many of us parents have ever uttered, "How many times have I told you..."? Once was enough for Ward and June Cleaver, shouldn't it be enough for our Heavenly Father? How many times does God have to say something for it to stick?

For that matter, does this rule apply only to the 10 Commandments? Off the top of my head, I don't remember something like, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth." (Gen 1:28) showing up anywhere after, "The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ..." [feel free to fill up the comments section with evidence that my memory is faulty...I'll gladly eat those words.]

Instead, why don't we just rest on, "the grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever" (Is. 40:8)? And we shouldn't forget, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished" (Matt 5:17-18).

2. Bzzzzt! Sorry, thanks for playing. Are you sure you've read the thing? 'Cuz it's all over the place. Especially in those first few books--y'know the ones with all the red letters.

Jesus spent a whole lot of time correcting misapprehensions regarding the Sabbath, did he not? Why spend all that time doing so, if he was just going to eliminate the whole thing in a couple of years? Why would his apostles bother recording these teachings if they were obsolete by the time they set pen to papyrus? Why does he assert his lordship over the day, when it's time is almost gone?

I just stumbled onto this passage by Iain D. Campbell (while looking for something else) that fits perfectly right here.

But over what is Jesus claiming lordship? Over an Old Testament icon which he was intending to demolish? It makes no sense at all to say that the Sabbath was merely an Old Testament provision, one of the shadows and types which were to be done away in Christ. For Jesus to claim sovereignty over the Sabbath implies that the Sabbath remains under his jurisdiction.

It seems to me that we often fail to do justice to this great statement on the lips of Jesus. How can the Sabbath be altogether dispensed with by Jesus if he is Lord over it? Jesus does not say that he was Lord of the Sabbath, but that he is Lord of the Sabbath! If language means anything, then in Mark 2:28, Jesus is implying the permanent nature of the Sabbath as something over which he, as universal and eternal Son of Man has absolute authority. The day is his, as much now as ever. As long as Jesus continues to be Son of man, he continues to be Lord of the Sabbath.

This is no indication, of course, of which day is to be marked out as the Sabbath in the New Testament age. That has to be established on other grounds. But it is a clear indication of the fact that Jesus has not abrogated the Sabbath--he has not cast it into some Old Testament oblivion. The thinking that suggests that the Sabbath is gone cannot be accommodated with the claim the at Jesus makes here. If he is Lord of the Sabbath, then the Sabbath remains.

Jesus claims Lordship over the day, he attacks the legalistic misapplications of the Law by the Pharisees and other hypocrites. But He keeps the Sabbath. And He expects us to do the same.

One more example of presence of the 4^th Commandment in the New Testament, and I'll call this rant done. Hebrews 4:9 tells us, "So then, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God." That word translated "Sabbath rest" (sabbatismos) is a nifty little hapax legomenon that shows up in its verb form in the Septuagint, describing observing/keeping the Sabbath. Why use this word, in the middle of a passage about rest where the author had been using katapausis? Dr. Pipa sums it up pretty well:

The uniqueness of the word suggests a deliberate, theological purpose. He selects or coins sabbatismos because, in addition to referring to spiritual rest, it suggests as well an observance of that rest by a "Sabbath keeping." Because the promised rest lies ahead for the New Covenant people, they are to strive to enter the future rest. Yet as they do so, they anticipate it by continuing to keep the Sabbath.

A. W. Pink puts it in starker terms:

Here then is a plain, positive, unequivocal declaration by the Spirit of God. "There remaineth therefore a Sabbath-keeping." Nothing could be simpler, nothing less ambiguous. The striking thing is that this statement occurs in the very epistle whose theme is the superiority of Christianity over Judaism; written to those addressed as "holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling." Therefore, it cannot be gainsaid that Hebrews 4:9 referred directly to the Christian Sabbath. Hence we solemnly and emphatically declare that any man who says there is no Christian Sabbath takes direct issue with the New Testament Scriptures.

Let's repeat that last sentence one more time for emphasis: "Hence we solemnly and emphatically declare that any man who says there is no Christian Sabbath takes direct issue with the New Testament Scriptures."

'nuff said.

(sure, there's a whole lot of issues I left untouched on this topic. This one bit of bombastic turgidity can't cover it all...hopefully I'll get to those sometime.)