Strange logic for rejecting the Sabbath – Hidden unwillingness

Deutsch

The rigorous rejection of the Sabbath on the seventh day of the week follows a predictable pattern. People wriggle out of it, no matter what the cost. They aren’t above using some comical logic. But all of this cannot disguise the fact that it is simply an unwillingness to obey all of God’s commandments and, thus, also to obey God.

Fictional Logic for Rejecting the Sabbath

Some “justifying logic” for the obvious non-observance of the Fourth Commandment, the Sabbath commandment (Exodus 20:8-11, Deuteronomy 5:12-15), is simply incomprehensible.

“We observe Sunday because on this day Jesus Christ rose again after His death on the cross,” is the common justification for Sunday worship. Until then, it would still be perfectly fine, because Paul also pointed out to the “contentious” church in Rome that people could happily continue to maintain their customs and habits. Romans 14:5:
“One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.“

Yet this verse, of all things, is one of the favorites of those who want to use it to argue that one doesn’t necessarily have to observe the Sabbath, but can choose a day according to one’s own whim. Quoted alone, without any context, it can, of course, be interpreted that way. But that’s no longer possible if one also understands the context of Paul’s statement. A greater understanding of the content of this statement can be gained if the first four verses are also considered:

“Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations. For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him. Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.“

The context explains it

It’s about newcomers to the community. They were usually either Jewish or Gentiles. They all have their own traditional holidays for whatever reason. If these aren’t idolatrous holidays, why shouldn’t they be able to adhere to them? There’s no reason to condemn these people for this, let alone forbid them from practicing their traditions.

The same applies to certain foods on certain occasions. However, it should be noted that certain foods, such as shellfish or pork, are not even considered food, or were not considered food at all, and are still considered so today (Info).

Sabbath was gradually abolished

Extra-biblical historical records do indicate that isolated congregational groups observed the first day of the week (“Sunday”) separately as the day of Jesus Christ’s resurrection. But here comes the “small but subtle difference.” They observed the day of worship for Jesus’ resurrection IN ADDITION TO the Sabbath and NOT as a replacement (Info). While the Jewish congregations continued to observe the ceremonial laws, even though these became obsolete with the crucifixion of Jesus, the Gentile Christians limited themselves to a few holidays, such as Passover, but all observed the Sabbath.

Sunday was gradually introduced as a replacement for the Sabbath. With the growing influence of the community in Rome, from which the Roman Catholic Church ultimately emerged, the Sunday holiday became law under Emperor Constantine, not in the light of Jesus Christ, but in the light of the “invincible sun” (sol invictus). The “Honorable Day of the Sun,” i.e., paganism. The Council of Laodicea (c. 360) took the next step. In addition to reiterating the mandatory observance of Sunday, the observance of the biblical Sabbath was also prohibited. “One must not Judaize,” was the justification. Sunday is a must, the Sabbath is forbidden.

For this purpose, the Church of Rome also immediately defined Sunday as the “Lord’s Day.” A determination that cannot be justified anywhere in the entire Bible with regard to Sunday (Info).

“It has always been this way and it will remain so”

Thus, the tradition of the Roman Church, which was also adopted by Protestants from the 16th century onwards, has been maintained to this day and is considered absolutely self-evident. Therefore, the statement, “We celebrate on Sunday because Jesus Christ rose on Sunday,” is given a normative force. However, this norm does not exist, however much one might wish. 1,700 years of pagan tradition that disregards or attempts to abolish God’s law could be maintained for another 2,000 years, but that does not make it the norm, let alone the truth.

God’s law is just as eternal as His righteousness, and moreover, the truth (Psalm 119:142; 151). Therefore, the disregard of one of His commandments (10 of 10) will always remain a violation of the law, regardless of whether this condition or practice lasts for only 5 years, or for 1,700, 2,500, or 4,000 years. The greatest and persistent problem of ancient Israel was the disregard of the Sabbath. They were repeatedly warned to keep the city gates of Jerusalem closed on the Sabbath and to refrain from normal trade. But they didn’t obey because they didn’t want to. Even pagans from Phoenicia (the trading metropolis of Tyre, Baal worshipper) entered on the Sabbath. A blatant breach of the covenant with God.

An already predictable pattern

If questions arise after it has been claimed that the laws (including the 10 Commandments) no longer apply to Christians, and that the Sabbath no longer applies, the result is usually the following:
A: “So, is it permissible to steal, commit adultery, murder, bear false witness, worship other gods, covet, and curse one’s parents?”
B: “No, of course not.”
A: “Where does it say that? After all, the prohibition must be visible somewhere. Everyone must be able to recognize it.”
B: “Uhh”
A: “By what standard does God judge if there is no longer any law?”
B: “Uhh”

A common alternative is:

B: “We live under grace and no longer under the law.” (Info)
A: “So that means I’m allowed to murder, steal, commit adultery, etc.?”
B: “No, of course not.”
The “rest” continues as before.

Another common scenario is:

B: “Yes, the 9 Commandments still apply, but the Sabbath is no longer observed.”
A: “Where does it say in the Bible that the Sabbath was abolished?
B: “Jesus repeated the 9 Commandments in the New Testament, but not the Sabbath.”
A: “But the Sabbath is mentioned more than 80 times in the NT, so that it is observed.”
B: “After Jesus’ death, it is no longer observed.”
A: “In Matthew 24, Jesus urged people to pray that their escape would not occur in winter or on the Sabbath. This happened in 70 AD. a, thus working long after Jesus”
B: “But we Christians keep the Lord’s Day, Sunday”
A: “Who decided that, where does it say that in the Bible?”
Here, the affiliation to a church usually determines the further course of events. A Catholic usually emphasizes tradition, which is ultimately “at least” on a par with the Bible. The “faith department” of this church itself emphasizes that its traditions are above the Word of God (Info).

If the person is a Lutheran Evangelical, the last question is usually ignored and the question is returned to the discussion in a circular fashion:
B: “The apostles met on a Sunday.”

But not a single argument justifies or proves the abolition of the Sabbath, whereas the Church of Rome very openly and freely states that it has moved the Sabbath to Sunday (Info).

Equally popular:

B: “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. Jesus is also Lord over the Sabbath and has broken it himself.”.
A: “Yes, that’s right, the Sabbath was made for man, and Jesus is Lord even over the Sabbath. What is the logic of the Sabbath being abolished? Moreover, Jesus broke the Pharisees’ rules, not his own law. (Info)

Pure unwillingness

The constant resentment (Jeremiah 6:16, 17, Matthew 23:37), against better judgment, ultimately led to God repeatedly responding to the persistent transgression, despite inhuman patience. This will happen again, for the rejection of the Sabbath cannot be justified either with biblical statements or with “logic.” Only with persistent resentment.

According to the “logic” that one does not keep the Sabbath (anymore) because the day of the resurrection of Jesus Christ is celebrated, the following constellations would be equally “logical”:

• We donate a lot of money to the needy, so (occasional) theft is perfectly acceptable.
• We save many people’s lives, so (occasional) taking their lives is no problem.
• We are super-friendly to our many club members, so only the two parents can be despised.
• We pray to God regularly, so occasional participation in Hindu ceremonies is perfectly acceptable.
• Registrars perform countless marriages, so they are allowed to commit adultery every now and then.
• Therefore: We celebrate Jesus’ resurrection, so the Sabbath can simply be abolished.

As always, commemorating the resurrection of Jesus Christ on the first day of the week is neither wrong nor sacrilegious. Anyone who believes that Wednesday is a memorial day because Jesus was found by His parents as a 12-year-old after a three-day search on a Wednesday is welcome to do so. This also applies to a supposed Tuesday on which Jesus performed His first miracle (turning water into wine). Anyone who wants can call Tuesday their personal “Jesus Miracle Day.” But none of this overturns God’s law, which states in “Article 4” that the Sabbath, the seventh day, must be kept holy.

The “TimeSpace” Sabbath

The Sabbath, the 7th day of the week, was established by God immediately after 6 days of creation. It is the crowning achievement of His creation, as emphasized especially in Exodus 20:8-11. The Sabbath is the first thing God blessed and sanctified (Genesis 2:2-3). His first sanctification applied neither to a person nor to a place nor to a building, but to a period of time.

“Zeitraum” in German means a period of time, consisting of “Zeit” (time) and “Raum” (space). In the German language, it’s even easy to recognize how this Sabbath should be viewed. Not a “three-dimensional” space, but rather that of a time. An analogy can therefore lead to a better understanding. Anyone who sets out to commune with God in an ordinary place, a building, i.e., within a space, will therefore prepare themselves both internally and externally. It’s an extraordinary, very special event to meet the Most High and to dwell with Him. This is relatively easy to understand.

Entering the “Sabbath Room”

It is the same with the Sabbath. It is not a literal space, but a set-apart, sacred period of time in which this communion with God takes place. With the beginning of the Sabbath, one does not enter a room with walls, a floor, and a ceiling, but rather the time space of His Sabbath created for man. Therefore, the Lord also clearly emphasized in Isaiah 58:13:
“If thou turn away thy foot from the sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day; and call the sabbath a delight, the holy of the LORD, honourable; and shalt honour him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words:“

Who would ever think of behaving in a sacred place, in the presence of God, as one does daily at work or on the street, let alone at a festival, trampling on the facilities of that place, slamming the door, and discussing new business with others present? Just as this is avoided, and should be avoided, the same applies to the Sabbath period.

There will be no excuse

The Holy Scriptures are unambiguous, clear, and unequivocal. Neither the Ten Commandments nor the Sabbath have been abolished. Failure to understand this, trying to wriggle out of it like an eel, is nothing other than a clear expression of one’s own unwillingness. This lack of true faith, undiminished attachment to the world, the pressure of majority opinion, or whatever reason, is none of them an acquittal for refusing to obey.

The greatest danger facing such a “refuser” is the persistent absence of the Holy Spirit. The “blasphemy against the Holy Spirit” is not limited to “cursing and swearing,” but also involves the persistent refusal to resist the work of the Holy Spirit. There comes a point when the Spirit of God withdraws, forever (Info). The original, stubborn refusal to heed the voice of the Holy Spirit develops into permanent blindness to the truth.

In such a case, all hope is lost. Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is an unforgivable sin, as Jesus Christ himself emphasized. This person is already lost.

Bible verses from King James Version (1611)