The Fourth Commandment is of great controversy in the modern church. Many Christians today entirely ignore the Sabbath, and even many Reformed and Presbyterian ministers have moved far from a Sabbatarian position. Much has changed since early America, evidenced by the words of Conrad Speece (1776–1836), a Presbyterian pastor from Virginia, who said in an 1801 newspaper article, “Christians are generally agreed, in the belief of a divine warrant for the observation of the Christian sabbath.” Speece said this at a time when Christians in Virginia were a mix of Presbyterians, Anglicans, Methodists, and Baptists.
Yet it is ironic that the only one of the Ten Commandments debated as to whether it still applies today is the one explicitly rooted in the creation account—“Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God… For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day” (Exodus 20:9-11, ESV). Yet this rejection fits with the widespread cultural rejection of creational norms.
It should also not be missed that the only one of the Ten Commandments outright rejected by American Christians today is the one regulating time. American life has become so busy, sometimes with both parents working outside the home and children’s sports crowding evenings and weekends. (And don’t forget the NFL on Sundays.) Is it just coincidence that Christians now reject God’s demand to devote an entire day each week to worship? Yes, there are theological arguments put forth against the continuing practice of the Sabbath, as we will see. But it cannot be ignored that there is increasing cultural pressure to abandon the Sabbath.
Sadly, American Christians have abandoned their Sabbatarian heritage brought by the British to the various colonies, including the Puritans in New England and the Scots-Irish in the backcountry. Even Virginia, which disestablished the Church of England in 1786, enacted that same year “A Bill for Punishing Disturbers of Religious Worship and Sabbath Breakers”—a bill ironically drafted by the rationalist Thomas Jefferson. Yet the American church played a large part in abandoning Sabbath practice by (1) providing little resistant to the repeal of Sabbath (“blue”) laws, (2) providing little resistance to professional sports being played on Sunday, which began in the early 20th century, (3) and outright rejecting the existence of a Sabbath day (and thus embracing Sabbath-breaking).
What I want to do in this article is argue that the Bible expects Sabbath practice to continue in the new covenant. In a subsequent article, I will respond to objections to Christian Sabbatarianism, including the objection that there is no evidence the Sabbath day changed from Saturday to Sunday. To be clear, Christian Sabbatarianism generally consists of the following affirmations: (1) The Fourth Commandment has a moral component, not just a ceremonial one; (2) The day has been changed from the 7th to the 1st day of the week because of Christ’s resurrection; and (3) The day should be devoted to the worship of God, not employment or recreations.
The Expectation of a New Covenant Sabbath
While the Fourth Commandment is not restated in the New Testament, it is important to acknowledge that none of the first three commandments are explicitly restated in the New Testament (no other gods, no images, not taking God’s name in vain). Jesus and the apostles did not need to restate these commands relating to God’s worship because they obviously still applied to Christians. Often called the “first table” of the law, the New Testament assumes these four God-directed commandments still apply.
The Sabbath command broadly concerns the regulation of time, with the requirement that God’s people work and then devote one entire day to restful worship. On what basis could such a command not apply in the new covenant? Does God no longer regulate man’s calendar or time in creation? Thus, while there is room to debate the specific application of the Sabbath command in the new covenant, we are arguing that the Sabbath command must continue to apply to the Christian. The reasons are as follows.
First, the entire Ten Commandments are the foundation of God’s law, or what Reformed theologians historically have identified as the “moral law.” The Westminster Standards teach that “The moral law is the declaration of the will of God to mankind, directing and binding every one to personal, perfect, and perpetual conformity and obedience thereunto” (WLC 93). So the moral law applies to all men, and it is written on the heart of Christians (Jeremiah 31:33). And what is the content of this moral law? “The moral law is summarily comprehended in the Ten Commandments” (WLC 98), which of course includes the Fourth Commandment. Hence the apostles can freely quote the Ten Commandments as binding on the church (e.g., Ephesians 6:1-3). While there were civil/judicial penalties in the Mosaic law for Sabbath-breaking, as well as ceremonial laws falling broadly under the Fourth Commandment (feast days and Sabbath years), the Sabbath command at its root is moral. The day has been changed to Sunday in the new covenant, but the specific day was ceremonial and could be changed, seen in that the Sabbath principle of six and one is upheld. Accordingly, God has established the Sabbath “in his Word, by a positive, moral, and perpetual commandment binding all men in all ages” (WCF 21.7).
Second, the weekly Sabbath command is rooted in creation (“For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth,” Exodus 20:11). What makes this relevant is that we still live in this created world. We live in the same world that Old Testament Israel did, and there is no basis for overturning such a creation principle. Nothing has changed in human nature that we no longer need weekly rest and worship. Our weekly schedule is regulated by God’s pattern set at creation (Genesis 1:1–2:3). Further evidence of such a creation order is that the Sabbath was practiced prior to the Mosaic covenant (Exodus 16).
Third, the weekly Sabbath is an important part of life as God’s redeemed. While the Sabbath was given for all mankind, the fall corrupted worship and Sabbath practice. But God restored Sabbath practice to its rightful place for His redeemed people. This is seen in that God delivered Israel out of oppressive slavery and into Sabbath rest, declared in the prologue to the Ten Commandments—“I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery” (Exodus 20:2). In fact, God’s redemption from slavery is given as the basis for the Sabbath in the restatement of the Ten Commandments in Deuteronomy 5:15— “You shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt.” Such weekly holy rest was a blessing as Israel anticipated eschatological (i.e., final) Sabbath in Christ (Hebrews 3–4). We still await the ultimate fulfillment of this rest in Christ’s return, so we still practice the weekly Sabbath as a foretaste of what is to come. Accordingly, if the Sabbath command no longer applies, then the new covenant is worse than the old covenant, not better (Hebrews 7:22). If the Sabbath command has been entirely abrogated, then Christians are no longer given a day each week devoted to God’s worship for their spiritual benefit. The Sabbath is for our good—we may not feel like spending the entire day in worship, but we need to spend the entire day in worship. So God calls us to set the day apart.
Fourth, the Sabbath command is required for the regulation of weekly worship. Without the continuing obligation of the Fourth Commandment on the Christian church, the basis for weekly public worship is diminished. If the Sabbath command has been entirely abrogated, this means there is no command requiring the church to set aside one day each week to the public worship of God. Accordingly, some churches have moved to Saturday night worship services, as they do not think God calls us to devote one specific day to public worship. Yet God did institute the Lord’s Day on the first day of the week because of the resurrection of Christ (Revelation 1:10; cf. 1 Corinthians 16:1-2). God has given the Lord’s Day as a testimony to the nations, just as the Old Testament Sabbath was a witness to the nations. Others are impressed by us setting the day apart, as Christians live differently from those who treat all days the same. To completely abrogate the Fourth Commandment is to remove all biblical warrant for the church regulating public worship, as well as to remove warrant for the civil government protecting public worship on Sunday and enforcing a public day of rest (see the civil magistrate’s duty here in WCF 23.3 [1788], WLC 118/124, WLC 129–130).
Fifth, the Sabbath was primarily about worship (not idle rest), and such regular worship is for man’s spiritual good. Jesus said, “The Sabbath was made for man” (Mark 2:27). But when we look at the details of the Sabbath in the Old Testament, we see rest and worship are inseparably connected (contra John Frame, who sees worship as subordinate to rest).[1] So Jesus meant that a weekly day of worship is for man’s good. Yes, the Fourth Commandment commands not doing “any work” and mentions that God “rested” on day seven (Exodus 20:10-11). However, the Fourth Commandment also says “the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God” (Exodus 2:10/Deuteronomy 5:14). While many translations say it is a Sabbath “of” the Lord (e.g., KJV, NASB), the ESV does best here by translating the lamed prefix in Hebrew as “to” the Lord. It is a Sabbath “to” or “for” YHWH. This shows Sabbath rest is a worshipful rest. The very first line of the Fourth Commandment also indicates the Sabbath is not idle rest—“Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy” (Exodus 20:8). This same language is used for God’s resting—“Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy” (Exodus 20:11; cf. Genesis 2:3). We are commanded to remember to sanctify/consecrate/set apart the Sabbath day. Throughout the Old Testament, this language is used for worship, to set people or things apart for God’s use (e.g., Exodus 28:3; 29:36). It makes little sense that God would say “keep the Sabbath holy” and mean “just sit around and refrain from work.” Rather, the Fourth Commandment calls for the day to be set apart for the worship of the Lord.
In addition to the language of the Fourth Commandment, the remainder of the Old Testament shows the Sabbath was a day for worship: (1) the Sabbath is connected with God’s “sanctuary” (Leviticus 19:30; 26:2), (2) Sabbath-breaking is tied with idolatry, that is, not worshipping God (Ezekiel 20:16, 20), (3) Psalm 92 is “A Song for the Sabbath,” showing it was a day of singing praise to God, (4) extra sacrifices were offered on the Sabbath (Numbers 28:9-10), (5) and there were sacred assemblies on the Sabbath (Leviticus 23:8; Isaiah 1:13). The New Testament sets forth the Sabbath as the day for public worship in the synagogue, as Jesus read the Scriptures (Luke 4:16) and Paul preached on the Sabbath (Acts 13:15)—showing the Jews of Jesus’ day understood the Sabbath as a day of worship. This is why the Westminster Shorter Catechism say the Sabbath is to “be sanctified by a holy resting all that day, even from such worldly employments and recreations as are lawful on other days; and spending the whole time in the public and private exercises of God’s worship, except so much as is to be taken up in the works of necessity and mercy” (WSC 60). If the Sabbath is a day for worship, then it follows that it is not a day for unnecessary commerce, work, or recreation (Exodus 35:3; Numbers 15:32-36; Isaiah 58:13-14).[2] And if the Sabbath is a day for weekly worship, then it follows that its practice would continue in the new covenant for the good of Christians.
Sixth, the continuing obligation of the Sabbath command is required to protect employees. Without the weekly Sabbath binding the church today, there is no requirement for a master (and by extension an employer) to give his servant or employee one whole day off each week. Mandated rest for “inferiors” (the old term used by the Westminster Standards for those under authority) was a major part of the Sabbath command—“you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant” (Exodus 20:10). Exodus 23:12 ties Sabbath with refreshing servants and resident foreigners, and Deuteronomy 5:14 speaks of servants having “rest as well as you.” Those in authority in Israel were to give inferiors (children, servants, employees) Sabbath because God gave Israel Sabbath, unlike the harsh taskmasters of Egypt (Deuteronomy 5:15). The Sabbath was given for the protection of all people, and that mandate continues today. The Sabbath command is “more specially directed to governors of families, and other superiors” (WLC 118). It is not a mere suggestion, nor is it a requirement that employees be given “some” time off left to the employer’s discretion. Apart from works of necessity, God demands that employees are given Sunday off in the new covenant. And if a Christian employer refuses to do so, he is to be brought under church discipline. Non-Sabbatarian churches have little recourse in such a situation.
Seventh, Scripture indicates the Sabbath will be kept until the end of history. Isaiah 66:22-23, regarding the new heavens and earth, says, “For as the new heavens and the new earth that I make shall remain before me, says the LORD, so shall your offspring and your name remain. From new moon to new moon, and from Sabbath to Sabbath, all flesh shall come to worship before me, declares the LORD.” This passage speaks of “all flesh,” a reference to all humans that includes the Gentiles (“all mankind,” NASB95). That the Sabbath continues in the new heavens and earth indicates the Sabbath did not end with resurrection of Christ. Additionally, Isaiah 56:1-2 says, “Thus says the LORD: ‘Keep justice, and do righteousness, for soon my salvation will come, and my righteousness be revealed. Blessed is the man who does this, and the son of man who holds it fast, who keeps the Sabbath, not profaning it, and keeps his hand from doing any evil.’” This blessing for Sabbath-keeping must refer to the new covenant because it speaks of eunuchs entering God’s house (Isaiah 56:4-5), and in the Mosaic administration eunuchs could not enter the temple (Leviticus 21:20).
Eighth, while the New Testament explicitly abolished ceremonial laws such as the food laws (Mark 7:19; Acts 10), it does no such thing with the Fourth Commandment. Instead, Jesus affirmed the Sabbath and corrected misinterpretation and misapplication by the Pharisees (Matthew 12:1-13). Paul’s epistles are raised as an objection here (Romans 14:5-6, Galatians 4:9-11, and Colossians 2:16-17), which we will deal with in a follow-up article. But for now, note that Paul still commands the giving of money to be done on the first day of the week (1 Corinthians 16:1-2), thus setting a weekly day apart from the rest. So he cannot be saying elsewhere that the church should not gather for public worship on Sunday. At most, Colossians 2:16-17 abrogates the ceremonial aspects of the Jewish Sabbath (the 7th day, additional feasts), leaving the Fourth Commandment binding in its requirement of worship on the Lord’s Day (Revelation 1:10).
Locating the Burden of Proof
All of this explains why the vast majority of Reformed theologians have been Sabbatarians, with some exceptions (e.g., Calvin, Cocceius). While the British (Puritan) view of the Sabbath is often pitted against the Continental view of the Sabbath, this analysis is incorrect. Yes, the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms (British) represent a strict form of Sabbatarianism with its prohibition of “recreations” on the Sabbath (WSC 60). However, many Reformed theologians of Continental Europe affirmed something similar. This includes the Swiss Reformer, Heinrich Bullinger (1504–1575), who said the Sabbath day was changed to Sunday so that we should “sanctify” the day and it should be the appointed time for “holy rest” (Decades, 1:260–261). Dutch theologians like Gibertus Voetius, Jacob Koelman, and Wilhelm à Brakel all held views similar to the British Puritans (with Voetius opposing Cocceius in the Netherlands).
Further, the Three Forms of Unity used by the Dutch Reformed are not that far removed from the later Westminster Standards. Heidelberg Catechism 103 understands the Fourth Commandment to require weekly public worship on Sunday. And its chief author, Zacharias Ursinus (1534–1583), in his commentary on the Catechism said the Fourth Commandment has “two parts—the one moral and perpetual, as that the Sabbath be kept holy; the other ceremonial and temporary, as that the seventh day be kept holy.” Ursinus said “the moral part of this commandment binds all men from the beginning to the end of the world, to observe some Sabbath.” Then Ursinus tied the Sabbath to public and private worship, saying God allots six days for work, “That all those other works which men ordinarily perform on the other days of the week, might on the Sabbath give place to the private and public worship of God” (The Commentary of Dr. Zacharias Ursinus on the Heidelberg Catechism, 557–558).
The Synod of Dort (1618–1619) used even stronger language in its Post-Acta, particularly in point 6 on the Sabbath—“This day must be so consecrated to worship that on that day we rest from all servile works, except those which charity and present necessity require; and also from all such recreations as interfere with worship.” In addition to affirming a moral element in the Fourth Commandment to set aside a day for worship (point 3), notice that similar to the Westminster Standards, Dort speaks of (1) consecrating the day to worship, (2) ceasing from works, except for charity and necessity, and (3) ceasing from recreations (see also Synopsis Purioris Theologiae, 21.58, 60). Thus, Daniel Hyde has concluded, “Dort can be called a moderately Puritan position on the Sabbath.”[3]
Therefore, the Synod of Dort held a Sabbatarian position close to that of the Westminster Standards. This means that in addition to the British Puritans, many Dutch Reformed theologians have held that the Fourth Commandment binds the Christian to devote the Lord’s day to worship and refrain from worldly employments and recreations. While Westminster Sabbatarianism is not the unanimous Reformed position, it is the majority Reformed position.
All of this should lead to the burden being placed on the person who says one of the Ten Commandments no longer applies today, not on the person trying to follow all ten. The continuing obligation of the Ten Commandments—including the Fourth Commandment—is the expectation of the Bible and the majority position of the Reformed churches. Show us in Scripture where God says the Fourth Commandment has no binding application to the church now that Jesus rose from the dead. But as we will see in a subsequent article responding to objections, this cannot be done.
For further reading on the Sabbath, see the recommended resource page.
[1] John Frame follows Meredith Kline’s earlier view that rest is of the essence of Sabbath, with worship as a subordinate aspect. Kline later changed his view to emphasize worship. John Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2008), 523, 540–544, 552–554.
[2] The Westminster’s “recreation clause” is a topic of its own right, but it is rooted in the principles set forth thus far, as well as the exegesis of Isaiah 58:13-14. John Downame, an English Puritan minister who worked closely with the Westminster Assembly, explained the forbidden recreations as follows—“all kinds of recreations which are not necessary for the preserving of health and life, and tend not to the better fitting and enabling of us for religious duties, but to sensual and carnal delight. Of which [lawful] sort are walking abroad that we may take the air… But from all other recreations which tend only to carnal and sensual delight, we must wholly abstain…because these worldly recreations do more dangerously and cunningly wind into our hearts…” Downame, A Guide to Godliness (1622), 383–384.
[3] Daniel Hyde, “Regulae de Observatione Sabbathi: The Synod of Dort’s (1618–19) Deliverance on the Sabbath,” The Confessional Presbyterian 12 (2016): 173–183.
Update 1/25/2024
As part of the decline of Sabbatarianism in America, the original Baptist Faith and Message (1925), used by the Southern Baptist Convention, was strongly Sabbatarian (echoing the language of the Westminster Standards). But the 2000 version added new language about "conscience" and cut language about (1) the entirety of the day should be devoted to worship, (2) "refraining from worldly amusements," (3) and works of necessity and mercy. Both 1925 & 2000 begin: "The first day of the week is the Lord’s day. It is a Christian institution for regular observance. It commemorates the resurrection of Christ from the dead..." But here are the differences:
"should be employed in exercises of worship and spiritual devotion, both public and private, and by refraining from worldly amusements, and resting from secular employments, works of necessity and mercy only excepted." (1925)
"should include exercises of worship and spiritual devotion, both public and private. Activities on the Lord’s Day should be commensurate with the Christian’s conscience under the Lordship of Jesus Christ." (2000)
