Originally published in Briefing #295 (April 2003).
Sabbath wisdom
Thank you for the stimulating essay by Joshua Ng on the Sabbath (Briefing #293). I especially appreciated the reminder that as Christians living under the law of Christ, the fourth commandment points us to the heavenly rest for which we were created.
I do, however, question the grounds on which Joshua builds his mandate for a weekly day of rest. He says, “God’s pattern of work and rest in Genesis [2:1-3] is still relevant and applicable to us”. Yet it should be clear from reading Genesis 1-2 that it is not a cycle of work and rest that is being described, but a one-off period of work leading to a climactic day in which creations blessed fruitfulness could be enjoyed. Day seven was ‘completion day’, not a day off before a new round of creating. What is more, God did not command his creation to sanctifY the seventh day, we simply moved into the seventh day by default.
In short, it is very hard to extract from Genesis 2:1-3 a mandate of any sort for humanity to obey. Although the early Christians probably rested on the Sabbath if they could, this was not linked to churchgoing, as they seem to have met together on the Sunday (Acts 20:7), which would have been a normal working day in both Jewish and Roman society. Of course a weekly day of rest is very good for us, but I believe it is a matter of wisdom rather than obedience.
Andrew Shead
Newtown, NSW
Consequences of creation and rest
Joshua Ng made helpful comments on society’s work obsession and on how Christians can be distinct in this regard. However, I disagree with his idea that the Sabbath is a command for all humanity, based on our created nature. Although this was not a major part of Joshua’s article, the idea has enormous implications, which are worth addressing. I held this view until recently. But when I came to preach on the Sabbath commandment, I couldn’t see why the Pharisees were wrong for criticising Jesus’ approach to the Sabbath. I realised something was wrong! Another look at the command in its context put me right.
In Exodus 20, God’s six-day creation followed by one special day is the rationale for keeping the sabbath. The link between what God did and what Israel should do, could be:
- Israel were part of God’s creation and so have an in-built 6-day/1-day nature. The command is to reflect the way that God created humans as part of His creation.
- Israel is to be like God, who followed a 6-day/1-day pattern. The command is to reflect the way that God created humans to be like Him.
Joshua claims both of these are true.
I now think that only the second is true. If we believe that we are ‘hardwired’ with a 6-day/1-day pattern, we must accept some far-reaching consequences. First, it means that we are not only required to keep the one day rest, we must also keep to the six days work. There can’t be a one-day-in-seven built into creation without the corresponding six days-in-seven. If 6-day/1-day is part of the fabric of the way we function, then we should expect to see disastrous social consequences where society adopts a 5-day/2-day weekly pattern. Christians who worked less than six days a week would be as much at fault as those who worked more.
Second, it means that there is no place for Christian workers to retire from work in their later years. To opt out of work like that would mean opting out of God’s creative design for us.
Joel Edwards
Newcastle, NSW
Sabbath rest now and then
I rejoiced as I read Joshua Ng’s article on the Sabbath rest but disagreed with him over his primary question of how we as Christians are to understand and apply it today. Joshua argues that Hebrews 4:9 does not apply to taking rest now but in the future. In other words, since the Sabbath rest that remains for the people of God is a future realisation, the exhortation to enter God’s rest (4:10,11) has no implication for the present observance of the day.
This argument seems to be in contradiction of the fact that in this very passage the Sabbath rest that remains for the people of God is presented primarily as a present experience into which “we who have believed enter” or “are entering” (4:3). The verb “enter” is in the present tense and in the Greek is placed first in the sentence to stress the present reality of this “rest”
experience.
The same is true of the verb “remains” (4:9) which, if taken out of context could imply a future prospect, but in its context refers back to the time of Joshua (Hebrews 4:8) in order to emphasise the present permanence of the Sabbath rest for God’s people.
John Cunningham
Moruya, NSW
Joshua responds
Thank you for all the comments which made me revisit many of my points.
I agree that Genesis 2:1-3 per se does not mandate anything of mankind; indeed, I would go further and say it does not explicitly mandate anything of Israel either! Yet Moses (and God) explicitly appeals to Genesis 2:1-3 as the rationale for why Israel should keep the Sabbath holy. At least it is because they were to be like God, imitating his pattern of work and rest. That is, we are to understand the relevance of Genesis 2:1-3 in the light of what God makes of it in later revelation. My question is, “If God thinks there’s justification for Israel to rest on the basis of creation, why should we limit it to Israel, given that we (humanity) also live in that creation?” If the basis had been on something unique to Israel’s experience, then it may well not apply beyond Israel, but that’s not the case.
As to what the fourth commandment stipulated for Israel, the emphasis falls on remembering the Sabbath day andkeeping it holy. I agree that more work needs to be done on what“keeping it holy” and “rest” should have entailed forthe Israelites. It involved fellowship with God and God’s people (as manifested in Eden and the promised land, and the gatheringat the synagogue on the Sabbath). However, not doing any work onit is a key part of keeping it holy. Does this mean they must workall the other six days? Not necessarily. The emphasis of the commandis that all work was to be done on the other six days, that is,that none be left over for the seventh (Ex 20:9).
As to the context of Hebrews 4:9, yes we are entering that rest (present tense granted in 4:3) … just like the Israelites were as they headed towards the promised land in Numbers 14. But the whole point of Hebrews 3-4 is that they failed to enter. We Christians are paralleled with them and warned lest we too fail to enter. In other words, ‘the rest’ is still future in Hebrews 3-4, and not yet our present possession, and we need to make every effort to enter it (4:11).
