Sundays = Lord's Day

Status
Not open for further replies.
This is not an official announcement (as we have not posted 2007 contents yet to the CPJ website) and I trust I'm not letting the cat out of the bag by mentioning it here (I know the editor at least can't take issue with me), but there will appear in the 2007 Confessional Presbyterian journal, a slightly modified version in English of an article that is appearing in the Fall 2006 issue of the Japanese journal, Reformed Theology. Sorry, no quotations. That would violate the editor's policy. However one of the two issues is the "change of the day." It is called John Calvin, the Nascent Sabbatarian: A Reconsideration of Calvin’s View of Two Key Sabbath-Issues, and is written by Stewart E. Lauer. Woody Lauer, as he is known by his friends, is Professor of Biblical Studies at Kobe Reformed Theological Seminary, where he teaches Old Testament, New Testament, and Hebrew. This article advances the view that Calvin is more of a Sabbatarian in his theology than traditionally has been granted. The draft before putting it in Japanese was vetted and reviewed by Rick Gamble and Stuart Jones, and then finally Dick Gaffin. Stuart Jones suggested Woody submit the piece to CP over WTJ; very nice.:) Stay tuned for more on the 2007 contents as I progress on getting the issue ready; long way to go.

[Edited on 10-2-2006 by NaphtaliPress]
 
Originally posted by R. Scott Clark
Andrew,

Thanks for this. It's very helpful.

I'm giving a lecture on the Sabbath and evening service next week and in January and turning into a chapter for the Recovering the Reformed Confession book.

rsc

Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot
Here are a few resources to consider on the issue of the change of the Sabbath day from the 7th day to the first day of the week:

Sabbath: The Day Changed, The Sabbath Preserved by A.A. Hodge

From the Seventh Day to the First: A Brief Look at the History of the Sabbath Day vs. Lord's Day by R. L. Dabney

The Change of the Sabbath by Thomas Shepard

The Covenantal Sabbath by Dr. F. Nigel Lee

Thomas Vincent on WSC 59

Matthew Henry on WSC 59

Fisher's Catechism on WSC 59

The Christian Sabbath: Examined, Proved, Applied by Brian Schwertley

The Perpetuity and Change of the Sabbath by Jonathan Edwards

The Perpetuity and Change of the Sabbath by James T. Dennison, Jr.

Questions about the Nature and Perpetuity of the Seventh-Day Sabbath, and Proof, that the First Day of the Week is the True Christian Sabbath by John Bunyan

Christian Sabbath by Sam Waldron

The Lord's Day by Francis Turretin

Additional resources can be found here, here and here.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

:up: That sounds like a good book to pre-order! :book2:
 
Jensen, What Bruce said:amen:

Are you all aware of the weakness in the "7th day sabbath=Saturday" argument based on the lunar/solar calendar change?

As I recall the problem arises because the OT sabbath is every 7th day. This creates a problem for the modern "saturday=7th day of the week" because of the fact that the Hebrews (in common with all of the ancients) did NOT have 'named' days of the week only numbered days of the month.

Add a lunar year of 12 30 day months & you have a problem the Jews acomidated the "extra" days by inserting "off-calendar" days between 2 months at 2 seperate times of the year. Thus you had 29th,30th, (day 1, day 2 ) 1st, 2nd, etc.

What this means is that the sabath in order to be every 7th day had to accept these 'extra' days--even though they are "off calendar".

Thus the OT sabbath was a "wandering feast" just as Christmas is to us same day of the month but a different day of the week. This is the reason that the early church had such big debates over the dating of Easter. They were trying to locate on a solar calendar a date from a lunar calendar, very confusing.

When viewed from our perspective of 7 "named" days of the week the Hebrew sabbath worked its way across all of them.

Ironically only by shifting to a solar calendar and a "fixed" & "named" week is it possible to worship both every 7th day and the same "day" of the week at the same time.
 
:up: That sounds like a good book to pre-order! :book2:
Click to expand...

Well, I started in in '03 and have re-titled it once and am re-writing it now. Don't hold your breath.

Really, you're turning blue and it's a little scary. Okay. That's better. :D

rsc
 
Originally posted by R. Scott Clark
:up: That sounds like a good book to pre-order! :book2:
Click to expand...

Well, I started in in '03 and have re-titled it once and am re-writing it now. Don't hold your breath.

Really, you're turning blue and it's a little scary. Okay. That's better. :D

rsc
Click to expand...

ezpi_blueface.gif
 
"There are no logical arguments from scripture regarding the day change, only speculations."

I gave two fairly lengthy arguments from (1) apostolic precdent and (2) secondary authority (filling in the gaps on the meaning of the Lord's Day).
 
My pastor used to have exchanges with 7th Day Adventists over the Sabbath, and one of the exchanges is below. He hasn't been bother much by them of late, at least not that he's told me.
The Christian Sabbath is the First Day of the Week
http://www.fpcr.org/blue_banner_articles/sda.htm
There's a good list of Christ's appearances after his resurrection and noting the time they took place where it is known.
 
The bit above about the "wandering feast" is important to note.

I would like to add that I read a very interesting piece in Rushdoony's "Institutes" some time ago, where the subject of the calendar came up, validating what Kevin described above.

He referenced/quoted research revealing from all appearances, the Israelite practice in the days of Moses and the Exodus probably followed the Egyptian solar-year reckoning. The year was 365 days (but no evidence of a "leap" year, at least not from what was quoted, so that small "slip" still had to be corrected at some point, maybe in a Sabbath year, or Jubilee year?)

And--this is quite interesting--the year always began on a Sabbath, always, every year. It had to. Because several subsequent dates had to fall on certain Sabbaths, often a specified number of days apart. For people like me who occasionally get strangely obsessed with biblical minutiae, seeing the results of this kind of investigation (and yes, sketching a typical "year" out on paper as described) is fascinating.

One "Sabbath" (I don't have the book right here, so I can't give you details) was actually 48 hours in duration; not only is it stated so in the text of Scripture, but 365 divided by 7 is 52 weeks+1 day. This addition of 24 hours in the year (by doubling one Sabbath) ensured the year would end on a "sixth day" every year. Thus, it is evident from the biblical record that the beginning and end of our week only has a 1-in-7 chance of correlating perfectly to the exact days of creation. So, those who obsess about Saturdays because that is the literal "day of divine rest since the beginning of the world" are simply ignorant of the earliest Jewish date-reckoning.

Temporally, the regular Sabbath moved "ahead" through the week countless times, one day per year, probably until the Babylonian captivity, when the Jews may have brought back to Palestine the modern lunar calendar (which adds a 13th month every 6 years).

Conclusion, we have no way of knowing whether our Saturday is exactly the creation Sabbath X 52 X (howevermanyyearsold the earth is). The important concept is that we have a week, we have a first day, and we keep that day unto God, and answer his summons.
 
Kevin and Bruce,

Thanks for your posts on the wandering feast!


As an aside, what about the teaching that the Lord's Day begins at sunset on Saturday?

I've noticed that Roman Catholics have mass on Saturday nights.
 
Conclusion, we have no way of knowing whether our Saturday is exactly the creation Sabbath X 52 X (howevermanyyearsold the earth is). The important concept is that we have a week, we have a first day, and we keep that day unto God, and answer his summons.
Click to expand...

I'm not obsessing but just being consistent, it could also be said that the important concept is that we have a week, we have a seventh day, we are told to keep that day (explicitly) and answer his summons.

I've never understood why my sola scriptura brothers will tolerate arguments from secondary authorities and jettison our fundamental hermaneutics of scripture alone and the analogy of faith so quickly in order to justify this day change.

We are so vigilante to not violate the second commandment that we will search hill and dale to find a childrens book that has no representation of Jesus. That this could cause our children to worship idols. Yet we accept that the fourth commandment was different than the rest of the decalogue in that the church, which instituted Mary worship, prevented priests from marrying, invented a pope and nullified the gospel, could change the very day that God from the beginning set aside and made holy.

Nope, I don't get it. But please, from scripture, can someone show me what I'm missing. By the way, I'm holding Turretin in my hand. I also have my Bible right here, direct me to the verse that changes the day.

[Edited on 10-3-2006 by BobVigneault]
 
Originally posted by non dignus
As an aside, what about the teaching that the Lord's Day begins at sunset on Saturday?

I've noticed that Roman Catholics have mass on Saturday nights.
Click to expand...

See this previous thread on when the Lord's Day begins as well as this article (updated link).
 
Bruce, thanks for saying what I was trying to say more clearly!

I feel like I can explain this to anyone with a calendar and a legal pad but to write out the explanation is challenging.

Bob the solution to your dillema is simple yet complicated to understand.

I say it is simple because Saturday is NOT the 7th day. Complicated to understand because you have to think entirly outside of the 'box' of our entire way of reconing time & days.

Re-read what Bruce said above, and try to think about it as if you dont "know" the days of the week.

Remember the Hebrews did not have "named" days of the week. They had no concept of "Saturday". To them a Sabbath was simply a number on the calendar. If you do as Bruce has done (me too, I am also a trivia geek) write out a Hebrew calendar for the entire year. Mark every Sabbath (harder then it sounds) then overlay our calendar for the same 'year' you will see that the Sabath wanders through every day of the week.

To me the irony is that those (adventists & 7th day Bapt) who claim to be keeping the "OT SABBATH" have not the slightest idea how to calculate the Sabbath of the Hebrews. Instead they follow the medeavil jewish rabbinical acommodations to the prevailing christian customs.
 
I understand perfectly what your saying Kevin. According to your proposition we don't know when the 7th day is or the 1st or the 3rd or any of them. I read a book about the Puritans in the south seas and the same thing happened to them in Tahiti. They were so vigilant in making the natives observe all their sabbath requirements never realizing that they had lost track of when the 1st was.

I agree with Bruce here, I'm not worried about the actual creation seventh day. According to common convention we have a week, it has a 1st day and a 7th day, we are told to keep the 7th day.

By way of disclaimer, I'm not trying to get anyone to change the day of corporate worship. I attend a Sunday worshipping church. I'm just pushing for a consistent hermeneutic and I want the hard core Sunday advocate to admit that SCRIPTURALLY, his argument is on shaky ground at best.

[Edited on 10-3-2006 by BobVigneault]
 
Sorry, Bob you wont get me to admit that:) !

I am perfectly happy if you want to call Sunday the 7th day. In fact in May of this year Sunday was the 7th day.

The 7th day Sabbath is a date i.e. a number on a calendar NOT a named day. Sunday is a named day of the week and as such it can have every number.

So all we have done is keep on observing the 7th day only superimposing the Roman practice of naming the days. Now we keep the 7th day on the "first named day" but it is still the 7th day.
 
Bob, You know me well enough to know I wasn't pointing any fingers at you (I hope).

And, (I'm not sure if I'm agreeing or disagreeing with Kevin now) I believe we keep "the first day" at Jesus' institution. Shabbat means "rest" and the old 7th day took that name to itself. Now that Jesus has truly given us "rest" we celebrate it.

I also see the change prefigured in the 2 decalogs (Ex. 20 & Deut. 5). In the first, the Sabbath is to be remembered because it is a creation ordinance. In the second, it is to be remembered because God saved his people and brings them into the land of rest.
 
Of course I knew you were not pointing your finger at me Bruce. As always I am so grateful for your well organized and thought filled contributions. I miss them when you are busy with other matters. Carry on.
 
I've never understood why my sola scriptura brothers will tolerate arguments from secondary authorities and jettison our fundamental hermaneutics of scripture alone and the analogy of faith so quickly in order to justify this day change.
Click to expand...
Bob: A secondary source is a matter of information, not authority. The Bible mentions chariots but does not explain what they are. We go to secondary sources (Eg. pictures from anicent Egypt and the like) for information about what they are. When an orthodox Christian leader 20 years out of the apostolic period says that the "Lord's Day" means Sunday, that is good information.
 
Originally posted by Scott

Bob: A secondary source is a matter of information, not authority. The Bible mentions chariots but does not explain what they are. We go to secondary sources (Eg. pictures from anicent Egypt and the like) for information about what they are. When an orthodox Christian leader 20 years out of the apostolic period says that the "Lord's Day" means Sunday, that is good information.
Click to expand...

Thank you Scott for the lesson in what a secondary source is. When I used the words 'secondary authorities' I was quoting you. ;)


Originally posted by Scott
"There are no logical arguments from scripture regarding the day change, only speculations."

I gave two fairly lengthy arguments from (1) apostolic precdent and (2) secondary authority (filling in the gaps on the meaning of the Lord's Day).
Click to expand...
 
Thank you Scott for the lesson in what a secondary source is. When I used the words 'secondary authorities' I was quoting you.
Click to expand...
I was lapsing into legal-speak. Anyway, I did not mean authority but source.
 
At the end of the day, aren't you left with the same facts from a biblical point of view? Jesus Christ kept the last day of the week as the Jewish Sabbath, and appointed the first day of the week as the Christian Sabbath. It seems to me that this nullifies historical conjecture about mistaken calendars.
 
Originally posted by armourbearer
At the end of the day, aren't you left with the same facts from a biblical point of view? Jesus Christ kept the last day of the week as the Jewish Sabbath, and appointed the first day of the week as the Christian Sabbath. It seems to me that this nullifies historical conjecture about mistaken calendars.
Click to expand...

Absolutely! :amen:
 
Originally posted by armourbearer
At the end of the day, aren't you left with the same facts from a biblical point of view? Jesus Christ kept the last day of the week as the Jewish Sabbath, and appointed the first day of the week as the Christian Sabbath. It seems to me that this nullifies historical conjecture about mistaken calendars.
Click to expand...

Yes, thank you Pastor Matthew for that voice of reason. (Although I'm still looking for that missing verse where Jesus 'appointed the first day of the week as the Christian Sabbath.')
 
Consider these two suggestions. I think they provide a jus divinum for the first day of the week. There is other evidence, but it is more of the nature of ex abundanti.

(1) Christ appeared to, and was worshipped by, the disciples on the first day of the week; and not simply on the day He arose, but at least a week later as well -- the eighth day being, according to Jewish reckoning, the seventh separate day from the day of reckoning. He specifically chose this day to appear to the disciples, and passed over the last day of the week.

(2) The apostles specifically observed the first day of the week as the time on which they conducted public worship, and prescribed acts of public worship to the churches. In the case of the breaking of bread in Acts 20, the apostle was present on the seventh day of the week, but deliberately passed it by in preference for breaking bread on the first day of the week.

Blessings!
 
Originally posted by armourbearer
Consider these two suggestions. I think they provide a jus divinum for the first day of the week. There is other evidence, but it is more of the nature of ex abundanti.

(1) Christ appeared to, and was worshipped by, the disciples on the first day of the week; and not simply on the day He arose, but at least a week later as well -- the eighth day being, according to Jewish reckoning, the seventh separate day from the day of reckoning. He specifically chose this day to appear to the disciples, and passed over the last day of the week.

(2) The apostles specifically observed the first day of the week as the time on which they conducted public worship, and prescribed acts of public worship to the churches. In the case of the breaking of bread in Acts 20, the apostle was present on the seventh day of the week, but deliberately passed it by in preference for breaking bread on the first day of the week.

Blessings!
Click to expand...

I'm more than comfortable with that.
 
1. They would have worshipped Jesus on any day that he showed up. Jesus skipped the sabbath because he didn't want to cause a ruckus on the sabbath.

2. The breaking of bread does not a worship service make. I have been at many a meal where we broke bread and sang a hymn and it wasn't the Lord's Day or the sabbath.

3. Three, ( you didn't bring this up, it's a bonus), the apostles couldn't decide that they were going to honor Christ by changing the day of worship any more than we can decide we will honor him with a guy in jeans with a guitar and two girls in mini-skirts singing "Our God Is An Awesome God" 27 times before the offering is taken. God's made the seventh day holy at creation and all the apostles and angels combined didn't have enough authority to over turn the creator. In my humble opinion.
 
Originally posted by BobVigneault
1. They would have worshipped Jesus on any day that he showed up. Jesus skipped the sabbath because he didn't want to cause a ruckus on the sabbath.
Click to expand...

This objection is frivolous. How many times do we read of Christ coming into conflict with the Jews over the observance of the Sabbath? He is Lord of the Sabbath!

2. The breaking of bread does not a worship service make. I have been at many a meal where we broke bread and sang a hymn and it wasn't the Lord's Day or the sabbath.
Click to expand...

The fact of the matter is that the apostle was in Troas seven days, and the only day we read of bread being broken and preaching taking place was the first day of the week. The clause in both Greek and English indicates that the coming together was for the specific purpose of breaking bread. Thus it was a public ordinance which was being observed on the first day of the week.

3. Three, ( you didn't bring this up, it's a bonus), the apostles couldn't decide that they were going to honor Christ by changing the day of worship any more than we can decide we will honor him with a guy in jeans with a guitar and two girls in mini-skirts singing "Our God Is An Awesome God" 27 times before the offering is taken. God's made the seventh day holy at creation and all the apostles and angels combined didn't have enough authority to over turn the creator. In my humble opinion.
Click to expand...

This is negated by two facts. (1) That Christ, the Lord of the Sabbath, had already dictated in His own person that the first day of the week would be the day on which He is to be worshipped. (2) That the apostles were not private men, but fulfilled an authoritative function as ones sent by Christ to reveal His will.
 
I still don't see it. However, I am an unordained man and I get uncomfortable arguing with dear brothers who hold office in the church. So I'm going to try very hard to take a 'sabbath' from this argument. I believe the original post has been answered. It's a fascinating argument and I've spoke my piece. I pray I haven't frustrated anyone.

Rom. 14:5 One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. Amen

[Edited on 10-3-2006 by BobVigneault]
 
I pray I haven't frustrated anyone.
Click to expand...

Not in the least, Bob.

Rom. 14:5 One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. Amen
Click to expand...

Amen, indeed, Bob!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top