| Home | Our Hope | |
| Bible Study |
|
July 7, 2019 |
| What The Sabbath Is Not | ||
The topic for this study is a lesson from a CoG7 lesson book (TViR9 Lesson 3). In that lesson, the author tries to disconnect the Sabbath from its foundations in the Old Testament and give it a new foundation in Jesus' sacrificial death. He does this so he can eliminate Sabbath observance (Sabbath keeping) and change the Sabbath into a day that we celebrate instead.
This is part of a liberal takeover that is going on at the highest levels of the CoG7. It appears the liberals have found that the church's growth is limited by it's doctrine, which is different from the vast majority of churches. Therefore, the liberals are turning the Sabbath into something that won't inconvenience anyone who might consider joining the church.
Also under fire are the church's rejection of Easter and Christmas. The CoG7 is making ways for the church to be compatible with these. Clean meats don't appear to be under fire now, but that would have to be expected.
This study combines texts from 4 sources, which can be a bit confusing.
Colored text will be used to separate the text of the CoG7 lesson (black), the text from the teacher's guide for that lesson (blue), and the commentary on those (red). Quotations from the Bible are indented and colored appropriately.
The adage "a lie travels around the globe while the truth is putting on its shoes" is also true here. A lie is easy to make but it takes a lot of time to refute it. Therefore a 4 page lesson becomes an 8 page study
| Lesson 3 Receiving So when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, "It is finished!" And bowing His head, He gave up His spirit (John 19:30). |
The name of the lesson, Receiving, would not seem odd at first. There are perfectly valid Bible lessons that could have that title. The Sabbath is not one of them. In fact the reader will not even realize this lesson is about the Sabbath until the second paragraph of the introduction. Only when the reader comes back to look at the title will he say "Huh!?!" Also. the author will only refer to the Sabbath twice as something we receive and he will never offer any rational for believing it.
Similarly the reader would connect the title to the main verse which which contains the word "received". That is not the connection the author intends though. His connection comes from "It is finished" which he takes to mean that Jesus' death changed the Sabbath into something we receive.
Scripture Reading: Genesis 2:1-3; Hebrews 4:1-11
The author's discussion will not be Bible-based. He will never refer to Hebrews 4 or Genesis 2:2-3.
| All Supporting Verses | ||
|---|---|---|
| Verse Reference | Verse Text | How Used |
| John 19:30 | So when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, "It is finished!" And bowing His head, He gave up His spirit | Used to show a correlation between God finishing creation and thus a new Sabbath, though unstated in the text. |
| Genesis 1:31b | it was very good | Used to show that God said all of creation was very good (obvious and not worthy of a quote). The author needs to support his claim that God always rests after he has finished doing something good. The Bible never says that. God had pronounced the earlier days of creation to be "good", however, but he never rested after them. So the author uses "very good" as the level where a following rest is justified, instead of "good", and his claim becomes that God always rests after he has finished doing something very good. |
| Genesis 2:1 | God had finished the work he had been doing | This is the "finished" part of the above "very good". The author will try to link creation to Jesus' death using only the word "finished". He will do this by referring to Jesus' words on the cross, "it is finished." Because linking with a single word is lame, he is then going to try to add another linking word phrase, very good. He will do this by making the unsupported claim that Jesus' death was very good (and not just good). With the "very good" and "finished" links in place, he will claim that there must have been a rest after Jesus' death, of the same kind as the creation rest, even though the Bible makes no mention of it and it causes multiple theological problems. |
| Mark 2:27 | The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath | The author will claim that this verse is saying we shouldn't work hard in order to rest. That is a false claim. Also, the idea of "working at resting" is also not a Biblical idea. The Sabbath is, by definition, a ceasing from work, making it the exact opposite of work. Therefore it is not possible to work at resting. It is an idea that only a liberal could come up with. |
Objective: to understand the new covenant as a covenant of rest in what God has finished in Christ - a rest reflected in the Sabbath.
This is the first hint that something twisted is going on. The title was Receiving and the central verse was about Jesus' death and now it's talking about rest.
I've never heard anyone refer to the New Covenant as a covenant of rest. So, it should seem odd to most readers, but most would think "well, maybe" and give the author a chance to explain. This is classic liberal speak, however, the use of words that have one meaning for most people but a new meaning for liberals. In this case the word rest doesn't mean what we would expect, as we'll see.
Introduction: God's omnipotence means He is all-powerful and cannot become tired. Therefore, when we look at the creation account in Genesis 1:1-2:3, it becomes apparent that God ceased working on the seventh day not because He needed rest due to exhaustion but because after creating all things and crowning man as His regent on earth, He declared all things to be "very good" (Genesis 1:31b). This implies that there was nothing left to do; it was finished (2:1). A rest should always ensue after something is finished and "very good."
At first it isn't clear why he is even saying this. He'll come back to it later and then we'll see why.
The last sentence is especially strange. There is certainly nothing Biblical about it. He says God didn't rest because he was tired but that isn't his point, it's just basic theology. Instead his point is that he thinks the cause of God's rest is that God had done something "very good." That doesn't make sense. God has done many "very good" things since creation but he doesn't seem to have rested after each one. The author seems to recognize the problem and that he needs to rationalize that idea, and that's the purpose of the last sentence, "a rest should always ensue …". It's obviously nonsense.
This truth helps us properly understand the Sabbath day. It is not something we keep as a mandate in order to be right with God, thinking there's something more to do.
Despite the claim, there is no logic that connects the previous idea that "God rested because he had done something very good" and what the author says in the second sentence above. There is also no Biblical concept that can be used to fill in the gap. This is the first of the logically disconnected ideas he'll present.
He's trying to connect the phrases "nothing left to do" and "it was finished" to the creation account. These are words from or about Jesus. He wants to get to the place where he can make the point that Jesus did a "very good" thing, just like God did, and therefore there should be a rest observance for us, a new rest observance that replaces the old one. This new rest observance will have nothing to do to observe it, except going to church, which most Christians already do. His argument is that because the events are similar in one way, they are the same in other ways. This is defective reasoning.
We do need to clearly understand what he says in that last sentence, though. He'll come back it and it is a major part of his argument. He says "[The Sabbath] is not something we keep as a mandate." A mandate is "an official order or commission to do something." The Sabbath is the 4th commandment, so, yeah, you could say it is a mandate. We keep the Sabbath because God told us to and told us how to. We do what God says to do because we love God, not because it is a commandment.
Then he adds the clause, "in order to be right with God, thinking there's something more to do." It won't be clear what he is getting at until later. Liberals hate laws that are binding on them; it's part of their worldview. So, they hate the Sabbath. Therefore they can't understand why anyone would want to obey a law like that. The only way they can rationalize the fact that other people obey the law is to believe that they do it for some other reason, i.e., they must be doing it to earn salvation from God or to maintain their salvation.
… If we take this perspective, we immediately disobey God and are out of line with the whole idea of Sabbath rest. Working hard in order to rest is not rest, but work.
The first sentence is OK but he is going to drop something for the rest of his description. He will never address the fact that most people who observe the Sabbath do not do it because they feel they need to earn something from God. We do it because God told us to and because we love and obey him.
By dropping that little fact from the discussion he implicitly assumes that everyone who observes the Sabbath does it to earn something from God.
The second sentence is another logically disconnected statement. He is trying to say that observing the Sabbath to earn something from God is "hard work." That doesn't make any sense. Observing the Sabbath for the wrong reason is no harder than observing the Sabbath for the right reason.
He will extend this crazy idea to the point where the effort of keeping the Sabbath becomes work and more work than the work that is not to be done on the Sabbath.
… This perspective is the very idea Jesus taught against when He said, "The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath" (Mark 2:27).
This is simply a false statement. That is not the point Jesus is making here. He wasn't talking about observing the Sabbath for the wrong reason. His point was that the Pharisees had added so many man-made regulations to it that it had become a burden for the people.
… The Pharisees of Jesus' day misunderstood the meaning of the Sabbath and made it a taskmaster rather than a gift.
This also contains a false statement, though not a serious one. The Pharisees were the taskmasters who added the burden to the Sabbath.
The use of "gift" here is also surprising. Nowhere in the Bible is the Sabbath called a gift. It is called a blessing for those who observe it, but never a gift. God does say he gave us his Sabbaths, but that means he instructed us to keep his Sabbaths. If the author said "keeping the Sabbath is a gift," that would be closer to the truth. He can't say that, though, because it would contradict what he is trying to do - get rid of Sabbath keeping.
The author uses the word "gift" because he is trying to get the Sabbath and Salvation to line up and look the same so he can do something tricky. He needs to get "works" to line up and "gift" as well.
In reality, the Sabbath, like salvation itself, is something we are to celebrate as a gift from God and as a time we rest from our works - even from trying hard not to work.
This contains multiple deceits.
… It's a day we are to acknowledge God as the only one who has worked and finished what we mistakenly endeavor so hard to obtain.
This is a false statement. It can't be a surprise that the author doesn't understand the meaning of the Sabbath. Note the ongoing assumption that everyone who observes the Sabbath is endeavoring to obtain something from God.
… When we fail to comprehend and interpret the Sabbath day in light of the rest God gives us in Christ, we end up trying to "keep" something God wants us to celebrate.
His reference to rest in Christ is to this verse.
Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. (Matthew 11:28)
This verse is commonly used by people who try to cancel or deny the Sabbath. They use this verse to support the idea that Jesus gave us a rest in place of the Sabbath rest. This author is doing a similar thing with it.
When we include the verses that follow it, however, we see what Jesus was saying.
Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am peaceful and meek in my heart and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is pleasant and my burden is light. (Matthew 11:29-30)
These two verses elaborate on and clarify the previous verse.
A yoke isn't a piece of jewelry; it means there is work ahead. The burden will be light, but there will still be a burden. Also note, learning takes time. So, Jesus is saying that they will have less struggles in life than under the Old Covenant and at the end they will receive rest. That rest is a promised rest that we also have not yet received. It doesn't come until the second coming. For now, we work, as Jesus said.
Then He said to His disciples, "The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few. Therefore beseech the Lord of the harvest to send out workers into His harvest. (Matthew 9:37-38 also Luke 10:2, John 4:35)
Because Jesus was not promising a present rest, the idea that the present rest replaces the Sabbath is false.
Then comes the switcheroo (yes, that's a word). He made the false statement earlier that we are supposed to celebrate the Sabbath. Now he expands that to say we should celebrate and not "keep". Celebrate = good; Keep = bad. He is claiming God does not want us to keep the Sabbath. He is calling for an end to Sabbath observance as the Bible defines it.
… The result of a wrong perspective here is that we end up working on the Sabbath instead of celebrating what God finished on the cross. The Sabbath is a feast, not a fast - a blessing, not a curse!
He now generalizes the initial point, "some people keep the Sabbath to earn something from God" into "we", and it becomes "everyone who keeps the Sabbath does it to earn something from God". Therefore we are actually working on the Sabbath. Here's a reminder of the path he has traveled to get here.
Notice how he started with a particular group and ended with a new Sabbath for everyone.
This "celebrate the Sabbath" idea is coming up so often in his thinking (and on CoG7 web pages) that we need to ask the question, "how would we celebrate the Sabbath?". We get no help in understanding this from his idea of celebrating salvation. Do we jump up and down and say "whoop, whoop"? Do we thank God in prayer, "thank you God for giving me the Sabbath that I do not keep"?
In case there is any doubt that he wants to eliminate all Sabbath observance, which he calls "keeping", he is about to say that, but he won't say it that clearly.
Just as God ceased working on the seventh day because He made everything good and complete in the beginning, so we are to cease on the seventh day and celebrate the fact that in Christ, God made everything that humanity lost in Adam very good again. He finished the work of justifying us and making us holy. Therefore, we have nothing left to do in order to rest
He now brings his statements about God's rest back into focus. He is trying to draw a parallel but it is all messed up. This is it.
| God created everything very good and complete | … so he ceased working |
| Jesus took something humanity lost and made it very good and complete | … so he ceased workingwe cease something and celebrate what Jesus did |
I think he had to change the words from "we cease working" to "we cease" because ceasing working is exactly what he is arguing against. So it becomes unclear what we are ceasing. He also sneaks in the "celebrate" that he wants even though it has no parallel. This is very contorted.
Then he talks about the finished work on the cross and makes another jump of illogic. It leaves us wondering how Jesus finishing his work on the cross should result in us having nothing to do to rest. It only makes sense because he has previously twisted keeping the Sabbath into being work. So Jesus' finished work finished our work of not working … which makes no sense.
… only something to receive as being finished and already done for us in Christ!
Here is where the lesson title connects in. He has pictured the Sabbath as being like salvation and says we should therefore receive it like we receive salvation, without working for it. As mentioned before, the Sabbath is not like salvation. Therefore the whole line of reasoning falls apart.
… The new covenant is a rest in Christ - that is, in what God has already accomplished in Him and promises to accomplish in us through His Spirit when we receive Him in faith.
This is a false statement as described before. The New Covenant is not a rest in Christ. The New Covenant is a time to build the kingdom.
In the table that follows, I have tried to describe the logical steps in the author's argument. I'm not happy with the result though. The author uses words deceitfully and gives them unusual meanings or changes the meaning during the argument. He also doesn't state some of his logical steps and the gaps need to be filled with best guesses. I've marked these guessed statements with "(implied)." He doesn't dare state them because they are so ridiculous that the reader would horse laugh in his face.
| Line of Reasoning | ||
|---|---|---|
| Point | Validity | |
| God rested after creation because he had finished something very good | False - the Bible does not say why God rested | |
| God always rests after he has finished something very good | False - the Bible does not support this idea or that there ever was or would be another rest | |
| After creation God had finished his work | True - obviously | |
| On the cross Jesus said "It is finished" | True - obviously | |
| After creation God said that it was very good | True - obviously | |
| Jesus' work was also very good | False - the Bible does not rate the quality of Jesus work. Was it good like a creation day or very good like the end of creation? Who can know? | |
| Therefore, Jesus' work is another instance of very good work that is finished | False - there is no Biblical basis for this idea and there is no logical basis for this conclusion. All they have in common is the word "finished" | |
| (implied) Therefore, God rested after Jesus died | The reasoning has been leading toward making this point, but it is not made. The author seems to be trying to get to the point where he can say there is a new Sabbath that results from this second rest that God took. It would be a false statement because the Bible does not support such an idea | |
| This line of reasoning appears to be abandoned and not referred to again. Later he refers to "the rest
God gives us in Christ", but that isn't the same thing as a new Sabbath. Later he also says the Sabbath is a gift. This may
be a reference to the new Sabbath. That would be confusing for the reader since the new Sabbath was not declared. An apparently new line of reasoning now begins |
||
| New Line of Reasoning | ||
| We don't keep the Sabbath because there is something more to do to be right with God | True - but the author will assume the only other possibility is that the Sabbath is a gift to be celebrated. He ignores the possibility that we keep the Sabbath because God asked us to do so and we love him | |
| On the Sabbath we rest from our work and from trying hard not to work | False - the Bible does not support any idea like "trying hard not to work" on the Sabbath. Later we'll see that he thinks stress is "trying hard". The author has no understanding of Preparation Day | |
| (implied) Keeping the Sabbath causes stress | False - Stress is caused by inner conflicts such as being required to do something you don't want to
do. Amos talks about this kind of stress and the Sabbath. It is the result of hating the Sabbath When will the New Moon be over that we may sell grain, and the Sabbath be ended that we may market wheat? (Amos 8:5) |
|
| (implied) Stress is work | False - Obvious | |
| (implied) Therefore, keeping the Sabbath is work | False - Summary statement is false because one or more supporting statements are false | |
| The Sabbath is a gift | Deceitfully unclear - What is meant by Sabbath? If he is referring to a day of the week, then the statement would be true but pointless as every day of the week is a gift. He actually means "Keeping the Sabbath is a gift" but he can't say that because that would contradict the point he is trying to make. | |
| Salvation is a gift that we cannot achieve by working | True | |
| (implied) Therefore, Sabbath is a gift that we cannot achieve by working | False - When you realize that he is talking about keeping the Sabbath, the statement blows up into nonsense "Keeping the Sabbath is a gift that we cannot achieve by working." | |
| Salvation is a gift that we are to celebrate | False - the Bible does not talk about a requirement to celebrate our salvation, nor does it refer to celebrating our salvation | |
| Therefore we are to celebrate the Sabbath as a gift instead of keeping it | False - the Bible does not support this. Logic does not support this either. The only claimed commonality between the Sabbath and Salvation is that they are both gifts, a claim that is not supported in the Bible. | |
| Summary | Both lines of reasoning give the appearance of having been redacted from a more complete line of reasoning. The reason for this is likely that the authors are not prepared to make some of the statements publicly for fear that they would be mocked and torn to pieces. | |
Questions for Study and Discussion
1 Read Exodus 23:12; Isaiah 58:6, 7, 13, 14; and Mark 2:27-3:6. Explain the nature of Sabbath.
1. Sabbath is consistently explained as a time set aside for us. For example, in the Exodus passage, the Sabbath was a time when even slaves could be off work in order to be with wife and children.
This is a false statement.
If because of the sabbath, you turn your foot from doing your own pleasure on My holy day, and call the sabbath a delight, the holy day of the Lord honorable, and honor it, desisting from your own ways, from seeking your own pleasure and speaking your own word […] (Isaiah 58:13)
He also depicts the Sabbath as a day off from work. This is a misleading statement. If your employer gives you both Saturday and Sunday off from work, one of them is the Sabbath, the other is not. One of them is different, as Isaiah said above.
He speaks of the 4th commandment's reference to slaves. The liberal hangup for slavery has blinded the author. He has missed the point of that commandment and therefore misinterprets it, thinking the point is so "even slaves could be off work in order to be with wife and children". He doesn't understand why slaves and certain animals are listed in Exodus.
2 Why do we observe the weekly Sabbath?
2. We observe the weekly Sabbath because Christians have a rest in Christ. That is, when Jesus finished the work of justifying and sanctifying on the cross, humanity who was not good became "very good" again.
There are multiple false statements. We observe the weekly Sabbath because God told us to. Humanity did not become good as a result of Jesus' death. Given his earlier words, it's impossible to know what is meant by "observe" but it's probably "celebrate"
3 Explain the relationship between Sabbath, the new covenant, and Jesus. Hebrews 4:4-7, 11.
3. The Sabbath is a memorial of God again finishing the work and calling it very good. In other words, the Sabbath is a celebratory time of resting in God's offer of a new covenant, through which we become "very good" again. We can therefore come boldly to God's throne to receive sufficient grace from Him. Jesus is the embodiment of the covenant rest, and He initiated and sustains it (Hebrews 4:4-7, 11).
There are multiple false statements. The Sabbath does not memorialize that. Humanity did not become good as a result of Jesus' death. The remainder is bafflegab (also a word).
4 What's the connection between God finishing creation and resting because it was "very good" and Jesus saying "it is finished" on the cross? Genesis 2:1-3; John 19:30.
4. In both instances, God ceased His work. He rested because His plan was fulfilled at the finish of each event, and therefore nothing else needed to be done. Humanity, in both instances, was very good after God's word was "finished."
Nonsense
5 List some examples of working hard to rest in your personal life.
5. There will be many examples given by the class. One is not cleaning up the messy house because it's the Sabbath and God says to rest. The problem with this is that the clutter and messiness of the house brings stress, which is anti-rest in and of itself.
So, in his Sabbath, a messy house is stressful, and that is sort of like work, and somehow that's greater work than cleaning the house, and somehow too much work, and it would be breaking the Sabbath not to clean the house. The Sabbath has been flipped upside-down.
In the real Sabbath, preparation day is the day for cleaning the house so you can rest on the Sabbath.
This reference to stress is the basis for the related implied statements added to the Line of Reasoning above.
The author has not only said that keeping the Sabbath can be too much work. Here he shows how low the bar is set for that. Stress is too much work.
Conclusion: Let's not work so hard to rest that we end up working anyway. We need to relax and receive from God - the point of the Sabbath. We need rejuvenation and healing in Christ; we need redemption through His finished work on the cross, so let us rest in God's provision there. The new covenant is not about doing but about being in order to do.
It appears the truth, according to the author, is that the New Covenant is not about doing the Sabbath, period. The real truth is that it is about doing, as stated above.
… Let us reevaluate our view of the Sabbath - the Lord's day - and understand its deeper implications. At the end of creation when Adam and Eve sinned, we lost what was "very good," but God again made us "very good" when He finished the work of redemption on the cross and re-created us in Christ Jesus for good works (Ephesians 2:10).
Regurgitated nonsense. It's interesting to see liberal rethink in action though. What he is actually saying in the first sentence is that he understands God in a deeper way than we do, limited as we are by the text of the Bible. We are supposed to have seen his deeper understanding by how he pulled new insights from the Bible. Therefore it is time to re-evaluate our view of the Sabbath.
We can know that these insights are true because he plasters them with many quotes from the Bible - quotes that are completely unrelated to his argument.
Application: This Sabbath, focus on the gift of the day. Pay attention to how hard you work at not working, or if you are receiving rest by surrendering in joyful cessation through God's finished work in Christ.
From other research I have done I believe the word "celebrate" means "go to church."
He has disconnected the Sabbath from its Old Testament foundation so it makes no sense to try to argue against what he says based on what the Old Testament says.
I think his message could be summarized fairly this way: When Jesus died on the cross he observed the Sabbath for us completely. Therefore there is no abstaining-from-work observance left for us and instead we are to observe the Sabbath by going to church. If we want to observe the Sabbath according to the Old Testament, we can do that as long as we don't work at it too hard.
The bar for "working too hard" is set pretty low. The stress of an uncleaned house is too much work.
There is no basis for this understanding of the Sabbath in the Bible or in Theology. So, we are to believe that, after 2000 years of Christianity some liberal has discovered the true meaning of the Sabbath. Hardly. I have previously documented 15 different theories about how the Sabbath was changed or canceled. This is number 16.
In this author's words there are hints at other themes that are common to liberal churches. It isn't possible to say for certain that they really are part of the author's theology. They are:
The CoG7 began with a man, Joseph Bates. There is no indication he ever believed what the CoG7 now believes. On the path to CoG7 other churches split off. The Seventh Day Adventist church was one. They do not believe what the CoG now believes. The World-wide Church of God was another. They did not believe what the CoG now believes. After Tkach took over that church and turned it into a Sunday, Easter, Christmas church, many other Sabbath keeping groups split off from it. They do not believe what the CoG7 now believes.
It seems odd that God would wait nearly 2,000 years to reveal the true Sabbath. An easier explanation is obvious. A church that has been taken over by liberals is changing its doctrine.