(or why Christians are not required to observe the Sabbath)
A few important caveats are necessary prior to proceeding with the following arguments. The New Testament makes Sabbath observance a matter of conscience. This is clear from Romans 14:5 that Paul permits for differences of opinion on this matter. If you are “fully convinced in [your] own mind” that Sabbath observance is a clear command of Scripture, you should observe the Sabbath. Don’t violate your conscience on account of my conviction. This freedom of conscience aligns with Paul’s argument in Col. 2:16. These issues are a matter of conscience. As a result, Christians should avoid binding the consciences of others with regards to these matters.
In light of that, here are nine reason I do not believe that the New Testament requires Sabbath observance.
- There is no creation ordinance associated with the Sabbath
Contrary to what is often asserted, there is no Sabbath creation ordinance in Gen. 2. There is no imperative at all to the first humans to observe the Sabbath (or the seventh day) in any unique or special way. An ordinance implies an imperative but no such command exists in the text. In fact, the only action that is mentioned with regards to the seventh day is God’s resting. By inserting an ordinance or command to the first couple into this chapter we lose sight of what is most notable– the very fact that there is no imperative to rest at all. This is because Adam and Eve had rest. The fall and the curse disturbed that rest. The narrative of Scripture is the redemption story of our entering back into the rest our first family experienced (see point 9) with God.
- The Patriarchs did not observe the Sabbath.
There is no biblical, historical, or theological record of the patriarchs observing the Sabbath. If the Sabbath is an eternal moral law written on the hearts of men and codified in the Ten Commandments, we’d expect to see echoes or explicit mentions of the Sabbath prior to the giving of the Mosaic Law but we do not. Unlike other commandments found within the Decalogue, there are no instances prior to the giving of the law in which an individual or group is said to have observed or violated the Sabbath. Murder, coveting, theft, and lying are all described within the biblical record before the Mosaic Covenant. But neither Sabbath breaking nor observing is recounted prior to the Exodus and the giving of the Mosaic Law.
- The Sabbath is a sign of the Old Covenant
The Sabbath, while harkening back to creation and the original state of man’s rest with God, is a covenant sign of the Old Covenant between Israel and God (Ex. 31). Each of the covenants that God creates with man are accompanied by signs. The Noahic covenant sign is the rainbow (Gen. 9). The Abrahamic covenant sign is circumcision (Gen. 17). The Mosaic covenant sign is the Sabbath (Exodus 31). The New Covenant signs are the Lord’s Supper (Luke 22) and (in my view) baptism. Covenant members distinguish themselves by taking upon themselves the signs of their respective covenant. Christians, under the New Covenant, do not assume the signs of the other covenants. This is why we do not circumcise children or observe the Sabbath.
- The meaning of the word.
The Hebrew and Greek words translated (or transliterated) as “Sabbath” are explicitly tied to the seventh day of the week (Saturday) on multiple occasions within the text. Genesis 2 does not use the word Sabbath at all, but instead “seventh.” This explicitly connects God’s “rest” to the seventh day of the week (not the first). This has theological and linguistic consequences. It’s inappropriate to take a word that is linguistically and theologically tied to the seventh day of the week and tie it to the first day of the week without doing violence to the very meaning and significance of the original words. This points to the significant differences between the meanings of the Lord’s Day and the Sabbath day.
- The significance of the Sabbath vs. the significance of the Lord’s Day
The Sabbath stood as a sign of the Old Covenant and recalled the first creation. The Lord’s Day is a day of celebration and gathering in light of the resurrection of Christ as the firstfruits of new creation and in anticipation of our eschatological rest. The Lord’s Day recalls the inauguration of New Creation in Christ’s resurrection. As such, that new creation work starts on the first day of the week just as it started on the first day of the week in the original creation. This is why we worship on Sunday, remembering the Lord’s resurrection as the first day of New Creation and in anticipation of the eschatological rest we have in Christ (see point 9) and the New Creation. The Lord’s Day anticipates a New Eden and New Creation and New Rest and New Life in Christ. To tie the Lord’s Day to the meanings associated with the Sabbath results in the loss of the most critical aspects of the meaning of the Lord’s Day. Observing the Lord’s Day through the lens of the Sabbath restructures our view of the Lord’s Day away from what he accomplished (gospel) in his resurrection, our new birth, and New creation, and causes us to see it primarily as related to our work and the (moral) law.
- The conflation of the Lord’s Day and the Sabbath
Sabbatarians conflate the Lord’s Day and the Sabbath. But the difference between the meanings of the words (linguistically and theologically) makes this unjustified. Moreover, the New Testament author’s do not use the two words/terms interchangeably.
- The explicit denial of the obligation to observe the Sabbath
Because the Sabbath was a sign of the Old Covenant and Christians are not under the old covenant we should not be surprised to see the NT authors explicitly deny Sabbath observance (Col. 2). To require or insist on Sabbath observance is to make the text say the exact opposite of what it says. This is also true with regards to the NT author’s instructions regarding other covenant signs. For example, the NT authors also make it clear that circumcision (a sign of the Abrahamic Covenant) is not required for Christians under the New Covenant.
- Christians are no longer under the law, of which the Sabbath was a part.
Christians must be mindful of their place within redemptive history. The law and its stipulations were temporary (see 2 Cor. 4:7-18, Gal. 3:19-29, Heb. 7:13). Christians are no longer under the law (Gal. 5:18). The Sabbath command was a specific command of the law, the Mosaic Covenant. Since Christians are no longer under the Mosaic law as a covenant, they are not obligated to obey the fourth commandment.
- The ultimate meaning of Rest
As Adam and Eve experienced rest with God in the original creation, the Sabbath command of the decalogue and the concept of the Sabbath was prophetic and anticipatory. It pointed us to the Sabbath rest we have in Christ (see Heb. 3 and 4), who fulfills the law (cf. Matt. 5:17). The Old Covenant (and the old covenant mediators) were entirely unable to provide rest for the people of God. But now a new High Priest, a new Joshua, a New Covenant mediator, and a New Covenant brings the rest that was merely a shadow (Col 2) of former things.