In a prior article (The Expectation of a New Covenant Sabbath), I made the case for the continuing obligation of the Fourth Commandment upon the church, with the Old Testament Sabbath day of worship being changed to Sunday in the new covenant. I gave several reasons why we should expect the Sabbath command to continue to bind Christians, and I sought to place the burden of proof on those who say the Fourth Commandment is no longer binding on Christians.
I now want to turn to three common objections that are made today against such Sabbatarian theology:
The New Testament abrogates the Mosaic covenant and thus the Fourth Commandment;
The New Testament teaches that all days are the same;
There is no evidence that the Sabbath has changed to Sunday.
All of these have to do with how we read and interpret the Bible as a whole, which explains in part why there is so much disagreement over the Sabbath today. The first two objections are related, but the second appeals to particular New Testament passages related to the Sabbath. And the third objection claims an absence of evidence, which we will seek to refute.
Objection 1—The Mosaic Covenant Has Been Abrogated
Baptist theologian Thomas Schreiner says, “I do not believe the Sabbath is required for believers now that the new covenant has arrived in the person of Jesus Christ.” In addition to his appeal to Colossians 2, Schreiner’s basis is that “believers are no longer under the Sinai covenant. Therefore, they are no longer bound by the sign of the covenant either” (40 Questions About Christians and Biblical Law, 211–212). However, this reasoning ignores at least two important facts—that the Sabbath was rooted in creation (Exodus 20:11), and that the Ten Commandments still hold significance for Christians who are not under the Mosaic administration (e.g., Ephesians 6:1-3).
Schreiner’s reasoning leads to the mistaken practical conclusion that the Sabbath’s only significance for believers is that it “points to the final rest of the people of God” and that “believers should regularly rest. But the New Testament does not specify when that rest should take place” (40 Questions, 214, 216). Everyone agrees the Sabbath in its eschatological sense points to eternal rest (Hebrews 3–4), and it is good that Schreiner sees some application of the Fourth Commandment to this life. By saying the Fourth Commandment teaches that “believers should regularly rest,” Schreiner admits the Sabbath command has a moral component. However, he does not show that moral component is limited to some unspecified principle of rest rather than a weekly day set apart for the worship of God. The actual content of the Fourth Commandment teaches that the moral component is a specified time (one day each week) for restful worship—“Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy… a Sabbath to the LORD,” a day rooted in God’s sanctifying of the day at creation (Exodus 20:8-11). Unfortunately, Schreiner disconnects rest from worship and leaves no basis for a weekly day devoted to the Lord.
While it is true that the Sabbath was the sign of the Mosaic covenant (Exodus 31:12-18), it does not follow that the Sabbath command is no longer binding now that Christ has come. The Mosaic covenant has been fulfilled in Christ, and its ceremonial aspects are no longer binding on Christians today. However, the Mosaic covenant was part of the covenant of grace, and we do not just throw outs its laws. As Jesus says, “I have not come to abolish” the Law and Prophets “but to fulfill them,” and, “Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:17-19). Accordingly, the Apostle Paul freely quotes the Fifth Commandment to honor parents as still binding on Christians in Ephesians 6:1-3, a practice that fits with the continuing obligation of the Ten Commandments, not their abrogation (though notice Paul sees some change by applying the land promise to the entire earth).
We are not under the administration of the Mosaic covenant (as Christ is our mediator, not Moses). But instead of this being evidence for the Sabbath being abolished in its entirety, this is evidence for the Sabbath being changed—and accordingly the day has been changed with the resurrection of Christ. While it is proper to speak of the law’s ceremonial aspects being “abolished” or “abrogated,” it is not correct to say the law in its entirety has been abolished, as the moral law continues to bind all people. When it comes to the Fourth Commandment, the specific day was ceremonial (or provisional), not permanent or essential. But there was a moral element to the Fourth Commandment tied with weekly worship, and that moral essence continues to bind. Since we are under the new covenant, we celebrate the Sabbath on Sunday, the day of Jesus’ resurrection.
Objection 2—Colossians 2:16-17 Teaches All Days Are the Same
This brings us to the objection that the New Testament teaches that all days are the same. There are three passages appealed to here: Romans 14:5-6, Galatians 4:9-11, and Colossians 2:16-17. Even some Presbyterians, such as Kevin DeYoung, have used these passages to argue against Sabbatarianism. DeYoung says of Colossians 2:16-17, “I know that some people have tried to argue that the Sabbaths mentioned here in Colossians 2 are a reference to monthly celebrations, not weekly Sabbaths. But the record of the Old Testament suggests otherwise. The threefold pattern—festivals, new moons, Sabbaths—occurs several times [Ezekiel 45; Hosea 2; 2 Chronicles 8, 31]… shorthand for ‘annual holy days, monthly holy days, and our weekly holy day.’” DeYoung concludes, “This means there must be some important sense in which the Sabbath is no longer a binding holy day for New Testament Christians.”
DeYoung admits that in the Gospels’ resurrection passages that “there seems to be a deliberate attempt in the New Testament to reckon the Lord’s Day as a new kind of Sabbath.” Yet he still detaches the Lord’s Day from the Sabbath command—“Strip away the cultural context and the case law, and the main takeaway from the Mosaic Sabbath is that we must rest from our labors and trust in God” (The 10 Commandments, 70, 72). It is this last statement that is of particular concern, and the problem is that is not the main takeaway of the Fourth Commandment. When the cultural context and case law are stripped away, we are still left with a command to devote an entire day to the worship of the Lord (Exodus 20:8-11). Though we should certainly trust God in keeping the Sabbath, the Fourth Commandment calls for faith expressed in obedience. We are to trust in God by devoting an entire day to Him each week.
We still live in this created world of seven-day weeks, so the principle of work six and rest one cannot be dismissed as “cultural context.” Rather, it is creational context, and it still applies. DeYoung’s “main takeaway” that “we must rest from our labors” is similar to the Baptist Schreiner’s minimal application that “believers should regularly rest.” Yet this limited understanding of the moral basis of the Fourth Commandment leaves little room for Sunday as the obligatory new covenant day of worship (as taught in WCF 21.7), and it removes the moral duty for employers to give employees every Sunday off (apart from necessities).
As for Romans 14:5-6, it says “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. The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord.” Paul is addressing Jewish ceremonial laws—festival days, as well as unclean foods (14:2-3, 6). He does not specifically mention the Sabbath, but he seems to permit Christians to celebrate certain Jewish feasts. However, in Galatians 4:9-11, Paul rebukes the Galatians for observing “days and months and seasons and years” (Galatians 4:10). Here Paul is likely speaking against Jewish festivals because of the context of the Judaizers in Galatia who argued the entire Jewish law must be kept for justification. It seems Paul was only opposed to Christians treating the Jewish festivals as if they were binding. (If Paul is referring to the weekly Sabbath in Galatians 4:10, this would only refer to the Jewish Sabbath, as discussed below.)
Colossians 2:16-17 and the Ceremonial Law
Colossians 2:16-17 is the most relevant passage here because it specifically mentions “Sabbath.” In my opinion, it is by far the strongest argument against the Sabbatarian position. Let us therefore quote the passage:
Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath [lit. “Sabbaths”]. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. (Colossians 2:16-17)
Is Paul including the weekly Sabbath as a “shadow” here? While those arguing for the complete abrogation of the Sabbath say yes, this conclusion is uncertain. Paul is surely speaking of ceremonial laws here, such as a “festival/feast” (heorte, see Exodus 23:15-16, 18 [LXX]) or a “new moon” (neomenia, see Numbers 28:11 [LXX]). In fact, these three terms (festivals/feasts, new moons, Sabbath) are commonly connected as ceremonial laws in the Old Testament (Nehemiah 10:33 [10:34, LXX]; Ezekiel 44:24; 45:17; Hosea 2:11; 1 Chronicles 23:31; 2 Chronicles 2:4). For example, Hosea 2:11 says, “And I will put an end to all her mirth, her feasts, her new moons, her Sabbaths, and all her appointed feasts.”
Thus, Paul may only be speaking of ceremonial Sabbath festivals in Colossians 2, not the weekly Sabbath. Archibald Alexander (1772–1851), the first professor of theology at Princeton Seminary, said of Colossians 2:16-17—“the word sabbath relates to the numerous sabbaths of the ceremonial law, distinct from the weekly sabbath. Whenever a festival of the law continued eight days, the first and last were always kept as sabbaths. Or the reference might be to the sabbatical year, for the word days is not in the original” (A Brief Compend of Bible Truth, 188).
However, let us grant that Paul speaks of the weekly Sabbath in Colossians 2:16. This still fits what we have been arguing, which is that the Jewish Sabbath has changed with the coming of Christ. We no longer keep the day on the seventh day, Saturday, for that was ceremonial and a shadow of what is to come. We now devote Sunday, the Lord’s Day, as a day of worship. As part of this worship, Paul commanded the churches to give money “on the first day of every week” (1 Corinthians 16:1-2). Thus, Paul set Sunday apart. And since Scripture interprets Scripture, this means Paul cannot be prohibiting a weekly day of worship in Colossians 2:16-17 (or Romans 14:5-6 or Galatians 4:9-11).
Accordingly, Archibald Alexander said of Colossians 2:16-17, “on supposition that the weekly sabbath was intended, the meaning might be that the Jewish sabbath, namely, the seventh day of the week, was no longer obligatory on Christians, since they had, by divine direction, adopted the first day for their day of sacred rest and of holding public assemblies for the worship of God” (A Brief Compend of Bible Truth, 188).
Similarly, Zacharias Ursinus said the moral part of the Fourth Commandment still binds all men, but the ceremonial part “in this respect does not pertain to us,” citing Colossians 2:16 (Commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism, 564). Heinrich Bullinger, citing Colossians 2:16-17 and Galatians 4:10-11, said, “therefore we at this day, that are in the church of Christ, have nothing to do with the Jewish observation; we have only to wish and endeavour to have the christian observation and exercise of christian religion to be freely kept and observed” (Decades, 1:260–261).
Therefore, we must be careful to not draw too much from Colossians 2:16-17, as some are inclined to do. This is one passage that on a superficial reading goes against the arguments from the rest of Scripture that the Sabbath commandment is still binding. At most, Colossians 2:16-17 teaches the ceremonial aspects of the Sabbath laws are done away with. In this sense, may even say the Jewish Sabbath has been abrogated, as we now keep the Christian Sabbath. We no longer celebrate the festival days that fall more broadly under the term “Sabbaths” in the Old Testament. Nor do we offer sacrifices on these days. Nor do we hold the civil government must administer the death penalty for Sabbath-breaking (a civil application). These festivals and ceremonial laws were not rooted in creation as the weekly Sabbath was. But now that Christ has come, we celebrate the weekly Sabbath on the day of His resurrection. The Fourth Commandment now applies to Sunday.
Objection 3—There Is No Evidence the Sabbath Has Changed to Sunday
The third objection to the Christian Sabbath is there is no evidence that the Sabbath has changed to Sunday. This objection provides a good opportunity to show not only the New Testament teaching on public worship, but also the Old Testament’s rich anticipatory background of the 8th day. It should be noted that this objection on its own does not undermine Sabbatarianism, as some groups like the Seventh Day Adventists affirm the Sabbath should still be observed on Saturday.
Moreover, some Reformed theologians have rejected that the Sabbath day has changed to Sunday while still affirming a practical Sabbatarianism. This can be seen in the Leiden Synopsis (1625), theological disputations given by four professors at Leiden University in the Netherlands. The Synopsis rejects “Sabbatarians or Sabbath-keeping Christians” and their premise that “the Sabbath-day of old is... merely transferred and altered into the Day of the Lord” (21.59-60). Yet while “in its special meaning the Sabbath is annulled in the kingdom of Christ,” the Synopsis says “it does not follow from the repealing of this Sabbath-day that the fourth commandment (which is a moral one, in a way) was entirely done away with” (21.45-46).
So while rejecting that the 7th-day Sabbath is transferred to the 1st day of the week, the Synopsis still calls for “a specific day... for an orderly and befitting time which the entire church is bound to observe,” that “this day be deemed sacred” and “the whole day be spent in the duties of piety and charity” (21.46). Thus, instead of affirming Sunday as ordained by God’s positive law, the Synopsis affirms the Lord’s Day “was fixed upon and ordained wisely by the apostles,” in order to “more readily make room for the public and private worship of God” (21.55-56). In practice, the Synopsis sounds like Westminster Confession 21.8 in saying “the Lord’s Day should be spent in the holy duties of piety not only in public but also privately” (21.58). And while “activities may be done that pose no hindrance to the worship of God” (21.58), the Synopsis disapproves of “those who profane the Lord’s Day” by “performing unnecessary or irrelevant activities (such as entertainments, games and plays)” (21.60).
Therefore, the Leiden Synopsis affirms two premises of Sabbatarianism (that there is a moral component to the Fourth Commandment, and the day should be devoted to worship and not employment or recreations), while rejecting the premise that the day has been changed from the 7th day to the 1st day of the week. This is similar to the Synod of Dort’s Post-Acta (1618–1619) that affirms that the Fourth Commandment’s “moral element consists in the fact that a certain definite day is set aside for worship” (point 3) and that “this day must be so consecrated to worship that on that day we rest from all servile works” (point 6). Yet Dort did not explicitly reject the day being transferred as the Leiden Synopsis does.
The Leiden Synopsis affirms a form of Sabbatarianism in practice, and its rejection of God changing the Sabbath to Sunday shows this objection does not necessarily lead one away from Sabbath practice. However, I think the Synopsis’s rejection of the Sabbath day being changed to Sunday weakens its conclusion. This is because the Fourth Commandment includes a moral element, as the Synopsis itself recognizes (21.46), and that moral element must continue in the new covenant. This moral element is not just a principle of rest but the command to set aside one day per week for worship (the principle the apostles pick up in the New Testament). Moreover, the Synopsis essentially ignores the significance of Christ’s resurrection for the transformation of the Fourth Commandment (Revelation 1:10). Thus, while I affirm the practical conclusions of the Leiden Synopsis, I think its argument can be strengthened by affirming the following argument that the Sabbath day was changed to Sunday because of the resurrection of Christ (and not just by the wisdom of the apostles).
The New Testament Evidence for a 1st-Day Sabbath
It is true there is no New Testament verse saying “The Sabbath day is now to be kept on Sunday.” However, the New Testament gives us every indication that Sunday now corresponds to the Old Testament Sabbath. This can be seen in three points.
First, the Gospels make clear that Jesus was raised from the dead on Sunday, the 1st day of the week. The resurrection taking place on “the first day of the week” is mentioned in all four Gospels, showing its significance (Matthew 28:1; Mark 16:2, 9; Luke 24:1; John 20:1, 19). It is not just by chance that Sunday came to be the day the church practiced the Lord’s Day. Rather, God ordained that Jesus died on a Friday and was raised on a Sunday. God chose Sunday as the day of worship, not the apostles. Sunday is the Lord’s Day because it is Resurrection Day.
Second, the New Testament tells us that the apostolic church began to gather for worship on this “first day of the week.” Acts 20:7 says, “On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul talked with them, intending to depart on the next day, and he prolonged his speech until midnight.” And 1 Corinthians 16:2 says, “On the first day of every week, each of you is to put something aside and store it up, as he may prosper, so that there will be no collecting when I come.” This is a command by Paul to set money aside (an act of worship) on the first day of the week, and as with all commands, there is a divine moral basis behind it.
Third, Revelation 1:10 calls Sunday “the Lord’s Day”—“I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet.” There seems to be a consensus that this refers to Sunday. The Greek word kuriakos (κυριακός) is only used here and in 1 Corinthians 11:20, where it refers to the “Lord’s Supper.” The word means something “belongs” to the Lord. Thus, the phrase “Lord’s Day” honors the 1st day of the week as a commemoration of Jesus’ resurrection. Just as YHWH claimed the 7th day (the Sabbath) each week in the Old Testament, so Christ claims the 1st day (the Lord’s Day) each week because of His resurrection. There is something special about this 1st day of the week. It is the day of the Lord, where Christians gather to worship the risen Christ. Now that He has conquered death, “the Lord of the Sabbath” (Matthew 12:8) claims the 1st day of the week as “the Lord’s Day,” the day on which His people will gather to worship Him. Contra the Leiden Synopsis, the day is claimed by Christ, not the wisdom of the apostles.
The Old Testament Background for an 8th-Day Sabbath
So the New Testament clearly teaches the first day of the week is set apart as the Lord’s Day because of Jesus’ resurrection from the dead, and it is therefore the weekly day on which Christians meet for public worship. Let us now turn to the Old Testament background showing that the 1st day of the week—which is equivalent to the 8th day of the week—had a special place in God’s worship. And with this, the Old Testament anticipated the moving of the Sabbath day to Sunday. The New Testament’s consecration of the 1st day of the week fits with the 8th day language of the Old Testament.
Sunday is the 1st day of the week, but it is also the 8th day (as there are only seven days in a week). And there is great significance given to the 8th day in the Old Testament. Circumcision was to be performed on males on the 8th day of their birth (Genesis 17:12). Firstborn oxen and sheep were to be given to the Lord as an offering on the 8th day (Exodus 22:30; Leviticus 22:27). For the cleansing of one under the Nazirite vow, he was to shave his head on the 7th day and then bring two turtledoves and two young pigeons to the priest on the 8th day (Numbers 6:10). Numbers 29:35-36 speaks of a “solemn assembly” with offerings but no work on the 8th day. Solomon held a “solemn assembly” to dedicate the temple on the 8th day (2 Chronicles 7:9). In Hezekiah’s day, the priests cleansed and consecrated the temple in eight days (2 Chronicles 29:17), and the king entered on the 8th day (2 Chronicles 29:20). We see something similar in Ezekiel 43:26-27, where the priests made atonement for the altar for seven days and then offered sacrifices on the 8th day. Nehemiah 8:18 says Ezra read from the law for seven days, and then there was a “solemn assembly” on the 8th day.
Further, there is significance to the 15th day, which is also an 8th day. In Leviticus 23:34-36, 39, God instructed Israel to celebrate the Feast of Booths on the 15th day. There was a holy convocation on the 1st day of the week (Leviticus 23:35), as well as on the 8th day (23:36). Leviticus 23:39 says “you shall celebrate the feast of the LORD seven days. On the first day shall be a solemn rest, and on the eighth day shall be a solemn rest.”
Additionally, there is significance to the 50th day, which is also an 8th day—seven weeks of seven days, then the 8th day of the final week. During the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost), Leviticus 23:16 commanded a new grain offering on the 50th day after the 7th Sabbath. This ties into the New Testament, as Pentecost was celebrated in Acts 2, and on that day the Spirit came upon the people. Pentecost was the 50th day after the Passover. Leviticus 25 speaks of the Year of Jubilee, which was on the 50th year, where land was returned to its original owners. That is the 8th day of the final seven-year period (Leviticus 25:8, 10).
All of this 8th day language led the Scottish theologian, Robert Haldane, to ask—“can it be imagined that the eighth, fifteenth, and fiftieth day, all of the same import, were thus distinguished without a special purpose, and that in the wisdom of God they were not expressly specified for some very important end?” (Sanctification of the Sabbath, 61).
So we conclude that there is plenty of biblical evidence that the 8th day (the 1st day of the week) would come to have a special purpose in the new covenant. The Old Testament anticipated the resurrection of Christ and the Sabbath being fulfilled and celebrated on Sunday. Jesus called Himself the “Lord of the Sabbath” (Matthew 12:8), so it is only right that the particular day of the Sabbath is now tied to the Lord’s resurrection. The change of the day makes the point that a monumental shift has taken place now that Christ has been raised from the dead—the Sabbath command is made known to all nations, to be celebrated on the first day of the week.
As Westminster Shorter Catechism 59 says, “Which day of the seven hath God appointed to be the weekly sabbath? From the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ, God appointed the seventh day of the week to be the weekly sabbath; and the first day of the week ever since, to continue to the end of the world, which is the Christian sabbath.”
Conclusion
Therefore, Sunday is in fact the Christian Sabbath. Although we are no longer under the administration of the Mosaic covenant, the Sabbath is part of the moral law of God, and its moral requirement to worship God one day per week continues in the new covenant. Further, the Sabbath is rooted in creation, and still living in this created world, we need a full day each week devoted to restful worship. As part of our redemption, the weekly Sabbath directs us toward eternal rest in Christ.
The Apostle Paul tells us the Jewish Sabbath and its ceremonial aspects no longer apply to the Christian, namely the particular day being the 7th day and the added Jewish festivals. Yet the apostles command us to worship on the 1st day of the week, and they set an example of this practice. So while Jesus never overturned the Sabbath, He did transform it with His resurrection, claiming it as the Lord’s Day. We now worship on the 1st day of the week in commemoration of the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, a day anticipated throughout the Old Testament Scriptures.
For further reading on the Sabbath, see the recommended resource page.
