These past few months I've been studying the principle and practice of Reformed worship. My study has led me to withdraw the two exceptions I took to the Westminster Standards when I stood for ordination exams before the Missouri Presbytery (PCA) in January: (1) Against the teaching that forbids recreation on the Sabbath and (2) Against the teaching that the making of any representation of Jesus Christ is forbidden by the Second Commandment. I now take no exceptions to the Westminster Standards.
As my family and I have begun to practice Sabbath observance in keeping with the Standards a question has come up in conversations with others: What shouldn't we do on the Sabbath?
I just began Rev. Dr. Iain D. Campbell's 2005 book On the First Day of the Week: God, the Christian and the Sabbath. I am enjoying it very much. Here's an excerpt related to the question above (which perhaps would better be asked: What should we do on the Sabbath?):
As my family and I have begun to practice Sabbath observance in keeping with the Standards a question has come up in conversations with others: What shouldn't we do on the Sabbath?
I just began Rev. Dr. Iain D. Campbell's 2005 book On the First Day of the Week: God, the Christian and the Sabbath. I am enjoying it very much. Here's an excerpt related to the question above (which perhaps would better be asked: What should we do on the Sabbath?):
Glen Knecht is right, therefore, to suggest that "the design of the Sabbath calls for a ceasing from our secular labours and our turning to the works that we shall be engaged in throughout eternity." For God's people, eternity will be an endless worship of God, in which we will marvel at all that God is. God's people will join with the elders to sing of the Lamb:Worthy are you, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honour and power, for you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created (Revelation 4:11).
The things, therefore, that we expect to do in heaven, are the things which ought to characterize our Sabbath rest. We cannot simply draw up a list of proscribed activities, as the Jewish leaders did, and expect to please God by not shaving on Sunday, or not brushing our jacket, or not polishing our shoes. That approach is precisely what Jesus condemns. But we will please God, and we will enjoy his blessing, if we use our Sabbath to rejoice in God, in all that he is and in all that he has done. That will be for us a following of his own example at creation (57).
17 comments:
You mentioned that what we expect to do in heaven should characterize our Sabbath...so, on the new earth, will we not work?
By reacreation, is that defined as organized sporting events, or informal sports, like throwing a frisbee around on a Sunday afternoon with the family?
Thanks for the clarification!
Natalie
Jay,
I appreciate this post. It is a good reminder of how we are given an entire day to delight in our God. The Sabbath is painted in such a negative light that we seldom hear it spoken of as a blessing from the Lord. appreciate Dr. Campbell's redemptive historical focus as well. So often a faulty RH approach is used to do away with the fourth commandment. Thanks for the post.
Hey Jay-
How does your few of the Sabbath fit in with our belief in the new creation? Since heaven is not our final destination, and the new creation is, how does this effect how we live now and observe the Sabbath? If we will be joyfully living out the existence that God desires for his people, what does that mean for us today? In addition, how does this fit into our view of worship as a way of life, and not just something that we do on Sundays?
I would be interested in hearing your take on these things.
Nick, Thanks for your encouragement.
Natalie, Hello there! You've never commented here before (that I remember). Welcome!
On the issue of work in the eternal state, did you have a particular text/teaching in mind?
On recreation (or any activity), my understanding is that the Sabbath is a special day given to us by God so that we "are taken up, the whole time, in the public and private exercises of his worship, and in the duties of necessity and mercy" (WCF 21.8).
Hi Wes,
Could you explain a bit further the distinction you are making between heaven and the new creation?
I definitely agree that our whole lives should be lived to bring glory to God (1 Cor. 10:31). Nonetheless, this should not nullify the Biblical teaching of special times set apart by God for special worship to him (i.e. the Sabbath day).
Here's an analogy: All our money is God's money, and all our time is God's time. Nonetheless, just as God requires a certain portion of our money as a special tithe to be set apart for him, so also he requires a certain portion of our time to be set apart for him (one day in seven, according to the fourth commandment).
I am curious about a comment you made in this post...
"My study has led me to withdraw the two exceptions I took to the Westminster Standards when I stood for ordination exams ....Against the teaching that the making of any representation of Jesus Christ is forbidden by the Second Commandment"
So, before your study, did you think representations were okay? And what made you decide differently?
I ask because this is a position I find hard to communicate to others, so I am interested in what made you change your mind.
Hey Michelle. Good to hear from you. Andrea and I miss you all at the Prov. Please tell Jason I said hello.
Regarding your question . . .
I took exception to the Confession's forbidding of images of the man Jesus because it was my understanding that the Second Commandment only forbade the making of images so as to have comprehended God, which, I understood (and still understand), was the only reason an image could legitimately be used as an object of worship. And so I reasoned: since the humanity of the incrante Son does not comprehend his divinity, then an image of the humanity of the Son need not be a violation of the Second Commandment. Fundamentally, my argument was based on the intent of the one making the image.
After studying issues related to worship in the reformed tradition, and particularly the regulative principle, I have come to see the first four commandments in a new light. I now see the imporatnce of the first table (i.e. the first four commandments) as a rule for proper worship principles and practices. We are to worship God only (First Commandment), without the use of images (Second Commandment), in reverence and awe for his name (Third Commandment), and with reverence for the day he has set apart as holy (Fourth Commandment). These commandments are for our good.
Given the tendencies of our depraved hearts and the usual tactics of the evil one, I believe the Second Commandment is best understood as forbidding any visible representation of God, regardless of our intent (which, again, is what my exception was based on). Even when our intentions are good, we are so prone to worship the seen rather than the unseen. We are prone to trust our eyes rather than the Word of God, which is our only rule of faith and life. That's why I retracted this exception.
I pray that is helpful for you. If I can answer any further questions let me know.
Hi, Jay. You said, "I believe the Second Commandment is best understood as forbidding any visible representation of God, regardless of our intent (which, again, is what my exception was based on)"
Would this include things like the Narnia movies because of who Aslan represents?
Thanks!
Oooo . . . great question exotesparemboles! I've never thought about that. What do you think?
Basically, the distinction I see in Scripture is that heaven is where believers go when we die, to be with Jesus in an intermediate state, and the new heavens and new earth is our final destination after Jesus' return and the resurrection from the body.
Our ultimate hope rests not in heaven (the intermediate state), but in the re-creation of all things and our glorious life after life after death.
Wes,
I thought this was the distinction you were making but was unsure. I agree with distinguishing between the intermediate state the state immediately following the day of judgment. However, I don't think the word "heaven" should only be attributed to the intermediate state. The Bible employs the word to speak of both states.
One example of its speaking of the state immediately following the judgment as heaven would be the the language of the "kingdom of heaven" used by Matthew with respect to Jesus' teaching on the final judgment in Matt. 25. Matt. 25:1 begins, "Then the kingdom of heaven will be like . . . " Then in verse 34 we read of Jesus' words to the sheep at the judgment: "Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world."
This is why the divines answer the question, "What shall be done to the righteous at the day of judgment?" writing:
"At the day of judgment, the righteous, being caught up to Christ in the clouds, shall be set on his right hand, and there openly acknowledged and acquitted, shall join with him in the judging of reprobate angels and men, and shall be received into heaven, where they shall be fully and forever freed from all sin and misery; filled with inconceivable joys, made perfectly holy and happy both in body and soul, in the company of innumerable saints and holy angels, but especially in the immediate vision and fruition of God the Father, of our Lord Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, to all eternity. And this is the perfect and full communion, which the members of the invisible church shall enjoy with Christ in glory, at the resurrection and day of judgment" (Larger Catechism, Q&A. 90, emphasis added).
Whatever we call it, what are the consequences with our belief in the new heavens and new earth (Isa 65:17; rev 21:1) on our observance of the Sabbath and our lifestyles of worship?
What are the consequences that our eternal destiny is a garden city (Rev 21-22) full of the glory of civilizations (Rev 21:24-27) and the redeemed people of God, characterized by the healing of the nations (Rev 22:2), the harmony of creation (Isa 65:25), and the presence of God (Rev 21:3)?
If Isaiah 65 is a prophecy about this new creation, it seems to suggest that our work will be involved: blessed, enjoyable work.
Here is Christopher Wright's conclusions about the new heavens and earth in his latest book, The God I Don't Understand:
"The new creation...is a busy place filled with all the potential of a transformed humanity, empowered by the same Spirit that raised Jesus from the dead, getting on with the task we were created and redeemed for, without tears, death, pain, or curse, but with the unmediated presence of God among us, living in the light of his face."
Wes,
I believe Isaiah is prophesying about the final state, the new heavens and new earth, in chapter 65. However, I am uncertain as to how literally we should take his description. For instance, in verse 20 he speaks of infants not dying and old men filling out their days. Furthermore, he says, "For the young man shall die a hundred years old, and the sinner a hundred years old shall be accursed." Surely we don't believe there will be infants (and child-bearing, cf. v. 23), old men, young men dying at age 100, and sinners to be accursed in the new heavens and new earth.
I think it would be better to understand that Isaiah is weaving in the imagery of his time to accommodate his hearers in order to communicate the blessedness of the final state. (Ezekiel in ch. 40ff does this when he uses the imagery of the restoration of the Mosaic sacrificial system in the new heavens and new earth, which many dispensationalists interpret as a literal re-institution of temple sacrifice as a memorial during the milennium.) Isaiah is speaking of the blessing of long life in the land with safe shelter and fruitful orchards. Ultimately these things, all connected with the concept of Promised Land, are meant to shadow forth the ultimate restoration in the new heavens and new earth.
On Rev. 21 and 22, I'm not sure what you are asking with respect to consequences for the Sabbattarianism of the Westminster Confession. Could you be more specific?
Jay,
I am curious your thoughts on the examples presented by the author of Hebrews, specifically chapters three and four. As you know the narrative contrasts the concept of rest with the Old and New, and our realized hope (or rest) in Christ; we entered the rest whereas Joshua and Israel failed to enter theirs.
How do you feel the rest mentioned in Hebrews would affect your outlook on the concept of a weekly sabbatical rest? (if at all) Would it merely be the same idea that both point to Christ and our rest in Him?
Cheers
Matthew,
Good questions. I see the author of Hebrews (AH) as basically comparing the condition of God's people during the time of Moses with God's people during the time of Christ.
The promise of final rest was typified by the Promised Land. Just as the Hebrews should have looked forward to entering the Land and persevered in the faith, so also we should look forward to entering the final state and persevere in the faith. The emphasis of AH in chapter 4 seems to be that the NT people should continue to strive to enter the rest set out before them (v. 9, 11; cf. Heb. 11-12).
I think the Sabbath principle of Scripture (i.e. one day in seven shall you rest) foreshadows our eternal rest in the final state.
Thanks for the response!
You are welcome sir.
Post a Comment