Tackling Tradition 18 - 7th Day.Sabbatarianism

From time to time the Party of the Circumcision rises up on the Internet or elsewhere (sometimes both) & decides to lecture us all about how we are all wrong about any number of practices & are probably (of definitely) in sin.  Let’s talk about Rigid 7th Day Sabbatarianism. 

The default position of Philadelphia Apostolic Presbyterian Church in Winston-Salem, NC is best defined as because Man was not made for the Sabbath (Mark 2) — rather it was made for man — both the Early Church, then later, Rome, via exercise of the Keys & in keeping with the terms of the Covenant, justly expanded & established the 1st Day of the Week as a day of worship, &, over time, rest. 

Objection:  You believe that 7th Day Sabbatarianism has been abolished!  

Answer: 7th Day Sabbath worship has never been abolished. It has been expanded, just as circumcision had never been repealed.  Rather, it has been expanded via baptism.   In fact, baptism came before circumcision according to 1 Pet. 3:21. 

Objection: Acts 17:2 reveals that Paul was a strict 7th Day Sabbatarian. Therefore we ought to follow his custom.  

.Answer: Aside from the fact that Paul was just one man among many, the text doesn’t command 7th Day Sabbatarianism.   

 It doesn’t matter how often Paul went into the synagogues.  Paul didn’t endorse the circumcision party.  He didn’t totally abolish the eating of food sacrificed to idols. The only reason he had Timothy circumcised was to placate the Jews in Jerusalem. Why then would he then turn around and agree with Rigid Sabbatarianism? 

Acts 17 is silent on whether or not Paul worshipped in the synagogue. It actually states he used it as a debate forum. 

Objection:  The Ephesian Church was taught to hallow the Sabbath, and that means 7th Day Sabbatarianism.  

Answer: You have no proof that the Ephesian church was taught your view on this issue. What we have is a record of them meeting to worship & fellowship sometime between sunset on Saturday & either sunset on Sunday or sometime before or after.   

Objection: You are teaching that the 7th Day is for the Jews & has been replaced by Sunday worship for Christians. 

Answer: I & PAPC have never said the 7th Day was made for Jews.  We affirm that Man was not made for the Sabbath.  

Objection: God worked on days 1 - 6, ergo 7th Day is not part of the creation, thereby proving (Rigid) 7th Day Sabbatarianism. 

Answer: The 7th Day most certainly is a part of creation.  God created the Day & chose to rest.  

Objection: Rome murdered Christ.  They were also trying to destroy us about 325 years later by legally recognizing & civilly establishing Sunday worship.

Answer;  This objection seems to ignore the role the majority of the Sanhedrin played in the persecution & crucifixion of Yeshua.  The Law teaches we must replicate & restore.  By recognizing & legality establishing & protecting Sunday worship, Rome was institutionally replicating & restoring to the Christian community for centuries of persecution.  

Objection: Sunday worship leads people astray from the one true day of rest & worship, the 7th Day. 

Answer: In the OT, Israel was ignoring the abiding principle to rest & worship.  In the NT, Yeshua confronted opponents who were engaging in works righteousness & legalism, which is exactly what you’re peddling here.  Rigid Sabbatarianism is as antithetical to the Law as was Israel’s licentiousness.  

Mt. 5:20 singles out legalists who prioritize ceremonial law & teach others to do the same.  Your reasoning process conduces to agreement with them. 

Objection: 2 Thessalonians talks about a man in Rome who seeks to challenge & change God’s Law. 

Answer: 2 Thess. 2 doesn’t specify a man in Rome. It describes two people, the Antichrist & the Christ-figure.  The latter one sets himself up against **so called gods** like those in any number of pagan pantheons.  The Antichrist parodies Christ & the Christ-figure.   Constantine claimed to be God. Ergo, this text isn’t about him. 

Objection: John 8 teaches that Christ’s kingdom is not of this world. No visible ecclesiastical institution nor any civil institution has the authority, power, &/o jurisdiction to modify Sabbath regulations. 

Answer: The Bible teaches that Christ is Redeemer - Mediator of every covenant (1 Tim).  He holds 3 Offices: Prophet, Priest, & King.  There are 3 sets of Keys that correspond to both His Offices & the 3 uses of the Law (Individual, Ecclesiastical, Civil).  That has been recognized as a standard feature of Christian Theology for at least 500 years. 

John 8 isn’t teaching that Christ & His designated representatives on Earth do not exercise depostic authority.  Rather, in context, Pilate is concerned that Yeshua might become a lightning rod for a riot.  “My kingdom is not if this world” is simply a denial that He is part of a Zealot revolution.  He is also conveying that His kingdom is not a morally worldly kingdom that uses morally means to secure its goals.    

The Bible doesn’t state that the Sabbath Day is only valid day for gathered worship. There was never a repeal of 7th Day Sabbath worship.  The early churches’ custom adds a specific day to the calendar. Neither the Bible nor Rome repealed 7th Day worship.  

It’s worth noting that you keep talking about the Sabbath Day as the 7th Day.  The 4th Commandment declares that the people are to work 6 days & set aside the 7th day out of a 7-Day cycle. It does not prescribe a Friday @ sunset to Sat. @ sunset day to the exclusion of any others. You ought to be able to deduce that the actual day or days of the week can be legally expanded.  

Sabbath regulations are a package deal.  If Rigid Sabbatarianism is true, there can be no expansion of the Hebrew feast/festival calendar in Lev. 23.  There is no command to observe Purim, yet Esther gives the rationale for it.  Yeshua attended the Festival of Lights — and He did so without sinning. 

Changing the times & the Law isn’t limited to the abolition/repeal of worship & rest regulations.  It also includes prohibitions on expanding the liturgical calendar in a manner that enslaves people to time, dates, seasons, & years — which is most certainly what you’re peddling here. 

Since the Law doesn’t conduce to the doctrine of the Circumcision, I don’t believe man is authorized to alter the Law & Gospel.   I agree with the Law, which teaches us that we are to administer the Law consistently & correctly, & the Law allows for expansion.