6. What About Paul and the Sabbath?

JERRY RECTOR | Physician

In the past, as a Sabbath keeper, I used the argument that since Paul kept the Sabbath, that was evidence that we should too. However, the Bible does not describe Paul “keeping” the Sabbath. What he does is visit the synagogue on the Sabbath to reason with the Jews, attempting to convert them to Christianity. Acts 17:2:

As his custom was, Paul went into the synagogue and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving that the Christ had to suffer and rise from the dead…” 

He also met with the Gentiles in some of their scholarly forums to reason with them as well. This cannot be construed as keeping the seventh day, or even worshipping on it. In Acts 18, we see that he was banned from the synagogue in Corinth, but was successful in converting some Jews, and they gathered in private homes, but we are not told when they worshiped. All I’m saying is that one cannot prove Sabbath worship from the examples of the apostles. One can make a strong case for witnessing and meeting potential converts wherever they are. That is what Paul and his friends devoted their lives to doing.

While in the book of Acts, I’d like to touch on the Jerusalem Council described in Acts 15. There were Jewish Christians who came to Antioch and were teaching that Gentile converts to Christianity had to be circumcised and “keep the Law of Moses.” The context most likely refers to the entire Old Covenant law contained in the Torah, including the Ten Commandments. There is no indication here, or anywhere in scripture, that this refers to only a “ceremonial” law. 

There is no clean way to separate them (especially since the Ten are expanded and elaborated on throughout the rest of the Pentateuch,) and Scripture never does either. I think it is clear, however, that the portions of the law being emphasized were the rituals, starting with circumcision. Peter described it as “a yoke that neither we nor our fathers” could bear in verse 10. 

You may say that the Sabbath is not in play here, but it is clearly a ritual. Its observance meets every definition of a ritual, and its role is central to Jewish religion.

You may say that the Sabbath is not in play here, but it is clearly a ritual. Its observance meets every definition of a ritual, and its role is central to Jewish religion. Ask any Jew today, or observe the way they keep the Sabbath. The council, including James (Jesus’ brother—head of the Jerusalem church), Peter, Paul, and Barnabus, met in Jerusalem to see what direction the Holy Spirit would lead them in guiding newly converted Gentile Christians in matters of worship and lifestyle. Sabbath worship may have come naturally to Jewish Christians, but it certainly wouldn’t be standard for Gentile converts. 

If Sabbath was an important aspect of a saving relationship with Christ, this would have been a great time to include it in discussion. Its absence from the final recommendations is very significant. Vandeman suggests this is because Sabbath worship was taken for granted. This is not good reasoning, however. It is an example of trying to fit the Bible into one’s belief system instead of developing one’s belief system from the Biblical evidence. 

You see, there were two major lifestyle rituals that set Jews apart from the rest of the world: Circumcision and Sabbath. Any convert to Judaism had to be circumcised (this was spelled out by Moses) and then of course had to keep the Sabbath, along with his household, including slaves and animals. It is inconceivable that this council would set aside a pillar of the Jewish religion—circumcision—and have the other pillar never questioned as well. Sexual purity was not enough of a “given” to escape notice. So it makes no sense that the Sabbath was understood as a part of God’s will for Christian living. 

Again I must say, the absence of recommending Sabbath worship for Gentile Christians is highly significant. Here is what they did decide, on James recommendation:

It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals, and from blood. For Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest of times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath.”—Acts 15:19-21. 

This last reference to the Sabbath is clearly a reference to Jewish worship, as it describes a worship practice that has been going on for years in synagogues around the world. This couldn’t describe Christian worship which was new and not that widespread yet. Again, it is clear from this passage that Gentile Christians are not expected to worship or live in ways that the Jewish Christians may have been inclined to worship—given their background and comfort level. A break is being made from Jewish-style worship. A New Covenant is being introduced.

This New Covenant contains the same moral expectations as the Old Covenant—to an even greater extent, in fact.

This New Covenant contains the same moral expectations as the Old Covenant—to an even greater extent, in fact. But the major difference is this: The Jews tried to follow the Old Covenant to gain righteousness and thus God’s blessing (…so that we might always prosper and be kept alive, as is the case today. And if we are careful to obey all this law before the Lord our God, as he has commanded us that will be our righteousness. Deut 6:24, 25) but they were never able to do it. And that is the point! 

We couldn’t have done it either. Only Jesus was able to do it, and in so doing He fulfilled not only the Law, but all of Scripture. It all points to Him!! 

This was, and is, the joy of Christian living. Christ’s righteousness covers my unrighteousness, and salvation is gained when I believe in Him and accept this gift. Paul reprimanded anyone who tried to add to this formula (Romans and Galatians.) The Holy Spirit then indwells my life and heart, and others can see this when observing my Christian walk. 

Both Romans and Galatians clearly address this as well. Adventists and other Sabbath-keepers would make the Sabbath an evidence of the Christian walk, but there is nothing to support this in New Testament Scripture. And in fact there is a lot of evidence that it did not make up a key feature of the Christian walk – early church or otherwise. Trying to make it a moral issue is impossible. 

Summary

The only conclusion one can make if you do this is to say that Christians who worship on Sunday are immoral. Most of us know, from our personal experience with friends and family who worship on Sunday, that they are Spirit-led and Spirit-filled people making a difference in their families, their communities and in the world. If they were lacking a key ingredient of morality, this would not be the case. Their house of Christianity would fall—built on the sand. 

I know that Adventists teach that these Christians are just misguided, and God hasn’t seen fit to show them the light yet. They figure they just haven’t been exposed to the idea of commandment-keeping and specifically Sabbath-keeping. But I’m here to tell you that these subjects come up often! From the pulpit to small group to talk radio to printed literature—the Ten Commandments and the Sabbath are mentioned/discussed/studied. 

The conclusions are certainly not always the same as yours and mine. But we cannot say that the topic is being ignored. It is being studied, and yet the Lord continues to bring people to Him without the Sabbath. Any moral issue, if ignored in a widespread fashion, would severely undermine the validity and credibility of the Christian walk, and in turn, would undermine the validity of the Christian’s claim that Jesus is God and was resurrected from the dead.

Let me summarize again: the apostles dealt with the subject of Gentiles being asked to keep Jewish customs as a part of Christian living. Several key areas from both moral and ritual domains were addressed, but Sabbath was not mentioned. One cannot build a doctrine for Sabbath-keeping around its absence. 

In fact, given the intimate association of Sabbath with circumcision and the rest of the Law, its absence in these recommendations makes a stronger case that ritual Sabbath keeping was not a key part of Christian worship, especially in the new Gentile churches that Paul started. †

One comment

  1. The argument is made that the Jerusalem council could have mentioned the Sabbath, but in the absence of specificity, it is subsumed under the auspices of circumcision or the law in general. This is actually a fair line of thinking, given the position of the Sabbath in the ritual life of Israel. Circumcision was the defining ritual that separated Jews from Gentiles, so much so, that Paul calls Israel “the circumcision” (Eph 2:11). Indeed, the 8th day requirement unquestionably relegates it to the “ritual” status, but more importantly to its “typological” standing as it foreshadowed life on the first day of the week—a day beyond the Sabbath. The Jews routinely used the logical paradigm of lesser-to-greater, as Matthew did when recounting Jesus’ statement that if the Jews would remove a beast from the pit on the Sabbath, then he had all the more reason to heal a man of his infirmity on the Sabbath. The reverse would hold true, as well. If Jesus healed a man on the Sabbath, then it would be righteous to rescue your beast on the Sabbath. To the Jewish mind, circumcision was essential to the Jewish religion and required of Gentile converts (Lev 12:3). The Sabbath was less than circumcision because they frequently employed Gentiles to do work on the Sabbath that they were not allowed to do themselves. If it were a moral law, it would be like asking another man to have sex with your wife because you could not perform that act yourself. Jesus understood that circumcision is greater than the Sabbath (Jn 7:22). Given the lesser status of the Sabbath, the argument is that if circumcision is a matter of adiaphora under the new covenant, then all the more the Sabbath, which is less than circumcision. This is why the Sabbath did not have to be discussed at the Jerusalem council. If the greater command is nullified, then so are the lesser laws, like the New Moon, Sabbath, and annual feast days. This is ultimately the point of Col 2:16.
    Interestingly, circumcision was a law that had a spiritual meaning. “Therefore, circumcise the foreskin of your heart, and be stiff-necked no longer (Deut 10:16-17). “Circumcise yourselves to the Lord, And take away the foreskins of your hearts (Jer 4:4)” This applied to both male and female. Thus, believers in Jesus fulfilled the law of circumcision by putting their trust in Christ’s sin-payment for them (Col 2:11). Believers in Jesus have fulfilled in them the soul-rest of his promise (Matt 11:28; Heb 4:3). “Was anyone called while circumcised? Let him not become uncircumcised. Was anyone called while uncircumcised? Let him not be circumcised. Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters” (1 Cor 7:18-20). Clearly, circumcision is NOT included under the rubric of “commandments of God”. If circumcision is not included, neither is the Sabbath. But people who advocate Sabbath observance do not follow the argument made by Jesus or Paul. To them the apostle says, “Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage. Indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing. And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law. You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace” (Gal 5:1-5). If someone struggles with whether circumcision is necessary, Paul gives a stiff warning. How much more a warning is due to those who cling to a command of less value than circumcision.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.