In his sermon, Mike Davenport addresses various arguments against the Sabbath, focusing on four biblical texts that are often cited in this debate. Starting with Romans 14, he discusses how the early church grappled with the transition from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant, particularly in terms of dietary laws and the observance of special days. He argues that the moral law, epitomized by the Ten Commandments, remains relevant, while ceremonial laws do not. Davenport distinguishes between moral and ceremonial laws, asserting that the Sabbath, as a creation ordinance, falls under the moral law. He examines Galatians 4, highlighting the dangers of legalism and the false gospel of justification through law, particularly the ceremonial law. In Ephesians 2, he clarifies that the enmity abolished by Christ refers to ceremonial distinctions, not the moral law. Lastly, in Colossians 2, he argues that while ceremonial aspects of the Sabbath may have been abrogated, the weekly rest remains vital. Throughout, he emphasizes the unity of the Ten Commandments and the continuing relevance of the Sabbath as a day of spiritual and physical renewal.

Turn with me to Romans chapter 14. Romans chapter 14. We're going to open up with these two verses in Romans 14, verses 5 and 6. One person esteems one day above another. Another esteems every day alike.

Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the day observes it to the Lord, and he who does not observe the day to the Lord, he does not observe it. He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks, and he who does not eat, to the Lord he does not eat and gives God thanks." Let's look to the Lord in prayer. Gracious God, we thank you for your word. It is forever settled in the heavens.

Lord, we pray that you would give us grace to understand this word today, to grapple with it, or that your Spirit would come and teach us and give us ears to hear what you would have to say to us. Not necessarily what we want to hear, but what you want us to hear. Help us, O God. Teach us, we pray. Leave us not to ourselves.

In Jesus' name we pray. Amen. You may be seated. Well it is easy to stand and wave the flag where the battle is not raging. I have for many weeks dealt with what I understand the teaching of scripture on the Christian Sabbath to be, But the question remains, can the standard be raised and lifted where that battle rages?

What about arguments that are brought forth by learned men and biblical scholars? Will the things we have studied and I have proclaimed stand up under the scrutiny of the biblical text brought forward by such men? Well, this morning I will endeavor to work through four texts that are often quoted as evidence that the Sabbath is no longer relevant in the New Covenant. And so, here we are in Romans 14, 5, and 6 to begin with. This will be the first text that we look at.

I want to read it again. One person esteems one day above another. Another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the day observes it to the Lord, and he who does not observe the day to the Lord he does not observe it.

He who eats eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks. And he who does not eat to the Lord, he does not eat and gives God thanks." Well, this text is used by some to argue that the Sabbath itself is considered by Paul right here a Christian liberty to be either observed or ignored. But is that what Paul intends to communicate here? Is that accurate? Well, we have the historical context somewhat spelled out for us in the book of Acts.

Acts tells us what was going on during the period of all the writing of these epistles. There was a shift from the old covenant to the new covenant, and the grappling with what still remained and what was changing. And this was no easy thing for the church. Peter and the other Apostles themselves struggled with these things as we see from Peter's interaction with the family of Cornelius and God's visions to him that he received in preparation for his visit with that family. We also have the immediate context here in Romans 14.

It's with the reality of these familiar difficulties, Jews and Gentiles worshiping together under the same roof, a young and immature church, and the changing of covenants. It's with these difficulties that we come to Romans 14. Paul begins with a discussion of differing views on foods, disputes over the clean or unclean nature of specific foods. And although Paul interjects into the conversation something concerning days in verses 5 and 6, he returns to the discussion of food in verses 14 to 23. And so, we're introduced here to two Christians, one who is considered weak, the other strong.

Weakness is attributed to the one because of a lack of knowledge or a lack of confidence in a liberty that Christ is granted. Note verse 14. Paul, obviously a strong Christian, declares, I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself. But to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. The strong Christian agrees with Paul arguing for the dietary liberty held forth in passages such as Mark 7, 18, and 19, and 1st Timothy 4, 4, and 5, where we find statements concerning the purification and the sanctification of all foods.

In talking about clean and unclean things, this is what Paul is confident of, that Christ himself has declared freedom from the restrictions of the dietary laws found in the ceremonial laws. Now, let's take a moment to revisit what we learned about the division of Old Covenant laws in the very first sermon in this series on the Ten Commandments. God Himself has distinguished the difference and He's highlighted them in His Word. Our confession merely recognizes the divisions God has created the categories of moral, ceremonial, and judicial or civil laws. Let's define once again, since we're dealing here, I think, with ceremonial versus moral, let's define once again both moral and ceremonial laws and then review some of the distinctions.

I believe this will equip us to more faithfully deal with our passages this morning and will also help us move through them a little faster having put in the effort up front. Well, the laws considered the moral laws were first written in the heart of man and later delivered by God in the Ten Commandments. So when we talk about the moral law, we understand that to be the Ten Commandments. Now, there are moral laws sprinkled and interwoven throughout all other portions of the law. Okay, you can take the the parapet, the little fence that was to be put up along the roof.

That was the law, a judicial civil law. You had to build that. What was the purpose? The purpose was born out of the moral law, thou shalt not kill. It was to further the sanctity of life by creating something that would keep people from easily falling off and killing themselves.

So you've got the moral law sprinkled and interwoven even through the other aspects. But the summary, the summary of the moral law of God is found in the Ten Commandments. Now, the laws considered ceremonial laws were laws having to do with method of worship, the priesthood, the tabernacle, the furniture of the tabernacle, and even the sacrificial system. These were all patterns and types that pointed to Christ into His coming, prefiguring Christ, prefiguring His graces, prefiguring His sufferings and His benefits. So there are distinctions made, you can see, between ceremonial and judicial laws, but there are larger distinctions in God's Word made between moral and all other laws.

Between moral and all these other laws. And so here are some distinctions pointed out by Bible scholars. First, the moral law, again, the Ten Commandments, was alone uttered by the voice of God before all the people of Israel. Exodus 20. The remainder of the law was given in private to Moses.

Second, the moral law was alone written by the finger of God. Deuteronomy 9.10. The remainder of the law was written by Moses as God spoke. Third, the moral law was alone ascribed in stone. The remainder of the law was placed in a book.

Next, the moral law was the only law placed in the Ark of the Covenant. Deuteronomy 10.5 and 1 Kings 8.9. The book of the law containing the judicial and ceremonial portions was placed beside the ark. The moral law in the ark, the other laws beside the ark. Next, the moral law was alone accompanied by the terror-inducing display of the presence of God.

God came down and the mountain smoked." We heard about that in the portion in Hebrews read earlier in our service. The moral law next was completed there at Mount Sinai. The remainder of the law, starting with portions received there on Mount Sinai, the remainder was delivered during the wilderness wanderings and was completed on the plains of Moab right before the people of Israel entered the land of Canaan. Next, the moral law was always relevant before Sinai, at Sinai, and even today. The remaining laws written in the book of the law were inextricably tied to the people's residency in the Promised Land.

Next, the moral law found its source in what had always been the very nature of God. The ceremonial law found its source in what was to come. Next, the moral law found its source in the being and attributes of God, who God is. The ceremonial law found its source in the work of Christ, what Christ would do. And then lastly, the moral law, because it is based on God who does not change, will never be abrogated or taken away.

The ceremonial law was to be abrogated and taken away because it was based on the finished work of Christ. The shadows are gone, The substance has come. Now, holding your place in Romans 14, flip over to Deuteronomy chapter 4. Deuteronomy chapter 4. And look down at verses 13 and 14.

Now note in this text the distinction Moses himself makes between the moral law and the remaining laws. A distinction God Himself makes, a distinction which we are not at liberty to ignore or deny. So He declared to you his covenant which he commanded you to perform, the Ten Commandments, and he wrote them on two tablets of stone. And we could say, in addition to the Lord commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments that you might observe them in the land which you cross over to possess." So you see the permanence of these 10 commandments written in stone. They're done.

Along with that, God said, teach them statutes and ordinances that will be necessary for them to do when they get into the land. It's tied to it. My brother and my sister, what other proofs must scripture provide to persuade us that there are distinctions within the law of God. God sees them as distinctions. Now, returning back to our text, we can safely say that because of the finished work of Christ, the dietary laws given to distinguish a people and to maintain purity for the promised seed, Jesus Christ, these restrictions are no longer necessary.

These dietary laws being the main focus of the entirety of chapter 14 is most likely the focus of much of the conflict and disputation. Note that there were similar laws ceremonial in nature that were also evidently brought into the food conflict, the observance of special days. We are not told what the days are and we are not told that it is a Sabbath day. Consider the following from Dr. Martin's book, The Christian Sabbath.

The days, quote, here in Romans 14 are specified by the ceremonial law and not by the moral law. We know this because the case that he cites first, unclean versus clean foods, is a ceremonial issue. It appears that both issues, food and days, are in the same category. That is, matters concerning the ceremonial law but not the moral law. If so, this means that the days that Paul had in mind were the feast days required by the old covenant ceremonial law, but not the weekly Sabbath required by the moral law." Paul here in this passage is noting two examples of things that the writer to the Hebrews described in Hebrews 8 13 as things becoming obsolete and growing old, ready to vanish away.

And that's why there were disputes. Because These were things that even when Hebrews is written, they're fading away, they're becoming old, and they're getting ready to vanish away. And that's...this changing of the covenants has brought disputes and disagreements. So that the Christian Sabbath is not in view here in this text should come as no surprise to us based on earlier studies. The Sabbath was a creation ordinance long before God enfolded it into his law.

And when he did introduce it to his law there in Exodus 20, he placed it among the moral commandments and not the ceremonial. Paul does not use the word Sabbath in this text, he merely refers to days. To make the Christian Sabbath the focus of Paul's words here in Romans is to introduce something to the text that Paul did not put there, and it is to ignore everything that God did to differentiate the moral laws from the ceremonial laws. We would also do well to note again that what we have here in this text is debate and diversity in the church regarding the subject at hand. And R.L.

Dabney reminds us about the observance of a Sunday Sabbath, there was no dispute nor diversity in the Christian churches." End quote. No dispute, no diversity in the Christian churches of those days. Well, turn with me to the second text, Galatians 4, 9 through 11. Galatians 4, 9 through 11. But now, after you have known God or rather are known by God, how is it that you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements to which you desire again to be in bondage?

You observe days and months and seasons and years. I am afraid for you, lest I have labored for you in vain." Now, once again, we must seek to gain an understanding of the context and bring that understanding to this text. Paul's reason for writing this epistle is to confront the church in Galatia concerning their receiving and embracing the ceremonial restrictions taught by the Judaizers. You see, Paul had brought them a clear and simple gospel, the gospel of Jesus Christ. The Judaizers had come to Galatia on the heels of Paul and sought to bring a false gospel.

Brothers and sisters, whatever Galatians 4, 9 through 11 is referring to, it is doing so in light of a false gospel that's being preached. In chapter 1 and verse 8, Paul declares that Judaizers are perverting the gospel of Christ. In chapter 3, Paul declares that the Galatians have been bewitched at having embraced Christ for their complete justification, they were beginning to imbibe the false notion that there must be more to justification than faith in Christ. Then in Galatians 5 verses 4 and 6, Paul declares, you have become estranged from Christ. Why?

Who? You who attempt, you who attempt to be justified by law. You have fallen from grace, for in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything but faith working through love." Do you see brethren that the issue at stake is summed up by Paul as a seeking to be justified by law and not just any law? The focus of these Judaizers was upon the ceremonial law, the laws that distinguished between the Old Covenant Jew and the Gentile. Even Peter got caught up in compelling these Gentiles to embrace these Jewish laws as Paul states back in 2 14.

Paul confronted him. Paul confronted him. You're trying to take the ceremonial laws and attach them and bind the conscience of these Gentiles to these old ceremonial laws. We're free from that. The focus of this expanded gospel teaching was on what distinguished the circumcision from the uncircumcision, Jew and Gentile.

And the focus was on the reason that such ceremonial laws were being thrust upon them. They were being told that it was Christ plus these ceremonial laws, that these things in the law were necessary for justification before God. And it was in this light that these Galatians were observing days and months and seasons and years. Note a few things. First, the word days is plural, as is months and seasons and years.

It does not seem to indicate that they were guilty of observing one particular day. Second, Paul doesn't explicitly state the Sabbath as the days he has in mind. He could have done that. Third, all of these are stated together. They're connected together as if to place them all in one category.

The only time such language is used in the old covenant is in text describing feasts and festivals, all ceremonial aspects of the law. And when the list included the Hebrew Sabbath, It only spoke of that day in relation to the aspects of the burnt offerings to be given on that day. Note Numbers chapters 28 and 29 and 2nd Chronicles 31, 1 through 3, and Nehemiah 10, 32 and 33, all of which such sacrifices associated with that day were summed up in the sacrifice of Jesus Christ so that rather than offering up burnt offerings to God on this his day we spend the day rejoicing in that once-for-all sacrifice for sinners Jesus Christ. He is the fulfillment not of the day but of the ceremonial sacrifices attached to the day. Now, these Gentile converts in Galatia were being compelled to live as the Jew, not as the new covenant Jew, but as the old covenant Jew.

In his coming, however, Christ redeemed those who were under the law and granted them liberty as the sons of God, even as Paul declares in chapter 24 here, or in chapter 4 here in this book, to take these observances of days and months and seasons and years, all held forth in the ceremonial law, and to take them past the point of Christian liberty as discussed in Romans 14, which Paul argued that on an individual basis in that particular time period could actually be kept as to the Lord to take those very things past that point of Christian liberty and to make them a source of justification is to be in danger as Paul states throughout this epistle of estrangement from Christ. It's to be bewitched. It's to actually fall from grace. Dr. Robert Martin at this point asks and answers the following question in his book entitled, The Christian Sabbath.

Quote, if we concede that Paul includes the Jewish Sabbath when he speaks of observing days? Are we not conceding that Christians have no duty to keep Sabbath at all? The answer is yes only if we ignore the context. Paul does not object to their observing holy days, etc. As such.

Indeed, indeed, he himself observed Jewish feasts on a couple of occasions, even after he wrote Galatians, see Acts 20 verses 6 and 16 and 1 Corinthians 16-8. He objects, the quote goes on, he objects solely to their observing such days and seasons in a misguided effort to secure a justifying righteousness of their own. He objects to their thinking that keeping the Sabbath, the feast, etc. Are works which God's favor, which merit God's favor in justification. Nor is he condemning their keeping the Lord's day as part of the Christian's rule of life.

The Galatians were still obliged to keep the moral law, the Ten Commandments, including keeping the Lord's Day holy as a rule of duty, though not as a way of salvation." You see, for the Galatians to embrace for the first time these old covenant ceremonial laws imposed upon them, Paul views as no different than going back to embrace the doctrines of their pagan religion. To do so, to embrace these ceremonial laws is to return. Now how can he say it's a return? Well, that's not where they came from. It shows you what he's thinking that the keeping of this laws for justification of God, he can compare them to any justification of any religion to do so in the sight of God in order to be justified.

To do so, he said, is to return to weak and beggarly elements. The elements would be different, the outcome the same. If the fourth commandment stating God's claim on one day of seven, if to embrace that commandment can be defined as a return to a weak and beggarly element of the law of God, pray tell what other of the nine commandments can also be described as weak and beggarly elements of the law of God. Where can a distinguishing line be drawn? Those who say the Sabbath is a weak and beggarly element, where's the line?

To show that the other nine that it is associated with are not weak and beggarly. And what if we start where Christ actually starts when teaching about the Sabbath. He started at creation. Would you call the Sabbath of creation a weak and beggarly element? It's certainly not of the law, but would you call it a weak and beggarly element?

The third text we shall examine is Ephesians 2, 14 and 16. Ephesians 2, 14 and 16. For he himself, that is Christ, he himself is our peace, who has made both, that's the Jew and the Gentile, he's made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, having abolished in his flesh the enmity, that is the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, and that he might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity." You will note in this text the phrase, Christ has abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is the law of commandments contained in ordinances. It is this phrase that has led some to conclude that the Sabbath has somehow ended, that Christ has abolished the law of commandments, and that while nine moral commandments still stand, this one, the Sabbath, somehow took the bullet and not the others. Well, we have already established the fact that the Sabbath pre-existed the giving of the law, that it was established at creation as an everlasting ordinance.

We saw the enforcement of the holiness of the day in Exodus 16. Remember the law was given in Exodus 20. In Exodus 16, we saw the enforcement of the holiness of the day before Israel arrived at Sinai. Do you recall the response of God when the people went out to gather manna on the seventh day? And the Lord said to Moses, how long, How long, what does that point to?

That points to the fact that this has been going on for some time. How long do you refuse to keep my commandments and my, Wait a minute, we're not at Exodus 20 yet, Lord. Is God misspeaking? Has he missed? Oh, I shouldn't have said this this early.

I know what's coming. No. How long will you refuse to keep my commandments and my laws? See, for the Lord has given you the Sabbath therefore He gives you on the six-day bread for two days. Let every man remain in his place.

Let no man go out of his place on the seventh day." So the people rested on the seventh day before Sinai. They rested on the seventh day like God rested on the seventh day after creation and like God was resting on this seventh day. He didn't give them bread. He gave them enough the day before. Now, when the Sabbath first appears in the law, note I didn't say when it first appears, but when it first appears in the law, it comes to us as part of a decalogue, moral law, and it appears among the other nine as a reminder of a holy duty already established at creation and as a reminder of an example already set by the Creator.

So when we consider the fact that this commandment is based on a creation ordinance and was given to all mankind, as we saw from the Gospel of Mark, that this was a benefit for man, the Sabbath was created for man. When we consider these things, there is no way we can embrace the argument that this was at the heart of the enmity between the Jew and Gentile referenced in our text. It goes back further than them. There was no such thing as Jew and Gentile at creation. In fact, there was no enmity to be found between man and God or between man and woman at that time.

That was it. Paul is talking about the abolishing of something that came well after the Sabbath was instituted. To what then is Paul referring then when he declares that Christ has abolished in his flesh the enmity that is the law of commandments contained in ordinances. Look at the context. Look back at verse 11.

Therefore, remember that you once gentiles in the flesh who are called uncircumcision by what is called the circumcision. He's introduced the separation right there. Made in the flesh by hands. This enmity, this separation was all bound up in that one word, circumcision. And what was the result of the distinction of not being counted among the circumcised people of God?

He goes on to say that at that time you gentiles were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world." You see, the idea of the being circumcised rests totally on the ceremonial law which declared that uncircumcised Gentiles were actually unclean. That was the separation. Clean and unclean, determined by what? Circumcised or uncircumcised? That was the wall of separation.

John Calvin in his commentary on Ephesians states it well, quote, the ceremonies by which the distinction was declared have been abolished through Christ. What were circumcision, sacrifices, washings, and abstaining from certain kinds of food, but symbols of sanctification, reminding the Jews that their lot was different from that of other nations. It is evident too that Paul is here treating exclusively of the ceremonial law, for the moral law is not a wall of partition separating us from the Jews, but lays down instructions in which the Jews were not less deeply concerned than ourselves. The moral law applied to all of us. It condemns all men.

If Paul cannot use the law to condemn all men, then how can he argue that it's not the separation? He's talking about laws that's separated. That's separated. And so, it's the ceremonial law. Well, the fourth text is probably the one that is most often referred to when arguments against the Sabbath arise, most likely due to the fact that Paul actually uses the word Sabbath.

So turn with me through the fourth passage, Colossians 2, Colossians 2. Look with me at Colossians 2, 16 and 17. Colossians 2, 16 and 17. So, let no one judge you in food or in drink or regarding a festival or a new moon or Sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ." Well just as the church in Galatia had been affected by the false doctrine of the Judaizers, the church in Colossae were being affected by the doctrine of the Essenes. Now the Essenes had crept in and introduced an ascetic lifestyle that they held forth as the secret to the Christian life.

You see, Christ was a great start, but there was more to the Christian life than you Colossians have been made aware of There are things that the Apostle Paul had failed to pass along. We're here to give them to you The as seen higher life was a life focused on self-denial and Mortifying the flesh. Oh It it had a place for God's law among its self-imposed religious observances. We see the aspects of that law mentioned right here. But Paul asked the church a few verses later, verse 20, Therefore if you died with Christ from the basic principles of the world, why is the living in the world, do you subject yourself to regulations?

Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle, which all concern things which perish with the using according to the commandments and doctrines of men. The enforcement of laws, be it doctrines and commandments of men or the embracing of the ceremonial aspects of the law, these things, Paul goes on to say, they indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility and neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh. Now again, as in the other text we have looked at, we come face to face with ceremonial aspects of the Jewish law. Food, drink, festivals, new moons, and Sabbaths. The fact that Paul refers to them as shadows plainly reveals to us that these things fall under the ceremonial portion, just as we considered under the previous text.

The difference with this text is that it actually mentions the word Sabbaths. Note that Paul mentions it in the plural and that it again is tied to this list of purely ceremonial components. But if we were once again to concede and to consider this is a reference to the Jewish Sabbath, we would not shrink back from a declaration that there are aspects of the old covenant institution of the Sabbath that have passed with the coming of Christ. And the passing of those aspects are ceremonial in nature and thus considered shadows. One we looked at a few weeks ago was the seventh day observation of the Sabbath.

No longer are God's people to celebrate a Jewish Sabbath on a Saturday. It was buried in the tomb with our Lord, and He arose on the first day of the week instituting a change, a new day. Another aspect is the symbology or the token that it was to be solely for the Jew. In his thoughts on this passage, H. C.

G. Mool writes, quote, it is plain from the argument that the Sabbath, in this text, the Sabbath is here regarded as it was adopted to be a symbolic institution of the Mosaic covenant and expressly adapted to the relation between God and Israel, an aspect of the Sabbath which governs much of the language of the Old Testament about it. In that respect the Sabbath was abrogated as the sacrifices were abrogated and the new Israelite enters upon the spiritual realities foreshadowed by it as by them. The Colossian Christian who declined the ceremonial observance of the Sabbath in this respect was right. An altogether different question arises, he says, when the Christian is asked to secularize the weekly rest which descends to us from the days of paradise and which is as vitally necessary as ever for man's physical and spiritual well-being." End quote.

Note, for example, the language that we find in Exodus 31, 12 and 13, 16 to 17. And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, Speak also to the children of Israel, saying, Surely my Sabbath you shall keep, for it is a sign between me and you and throughout your generations that you may know that I am the Lord who sanctifies you Therefore the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath to observe the Sabbath throughout their generations as a perpetual covenant. It is a sign between me and the children of Israel forever. So here we are in Exodus 31. Moses draws attention to something that seems to occur outside the giving of the actual decalogue.

He's not talking about when God came down and spoke to all the people because here God is speaking only to Moses and the Lord spoke to Moses saying speak also to the children of Israel. He's giving them directions. It's after he has spoken to all the people, the Ten Commandments. Here God tells him to speak to all the children of Israel. There is something more to be made known to them.

This statement is in addition to the already declared moral law. It's to become a symbol. It's to become a token, a sign that they are His people. Greg Nichols in his book, Covenant Theology, a Reformed and Baptistic perspective of God's covenant, I highly recommend that book. It gives such a clear understanding from a baptism perspective of the covenants.

It's not a word we have to run from. We can embrace them. The Bible teaches about them. And this is a great tool in learning Reformed and Baptistic perspectives of God's covenant. He notes the following quote, God told Moses to tell the children of Israel that keeping the Sabbath was a token of God's pledge to them throughout their generations.

Like circumcision, this sign requires human compliance. Like circumcision, those who break the Sabbath must be cut off from God's people. If God sees Israel keeping the Sabbath, it reminds him of His pledge to preserve and bless them as His people. If He sees them keeping His Sabbath, it reminds them of His pledge that when Messiah comes, He will make them a society of royal priests, Exodus 19. Conversely, if he sees them profaning the Sabbath, it reminds him of his pledge to punish and judge them with all the curses of his covenant.

Thus, what already was a creation ordinance, a gracious provision, and a moral obligation, what was already that, became a sign of the Mosaic Covenant. And he goes on to write, this introduces, introduces tension. When the Mosaic Covenant transitions to the New Covenant, so also this token is transformed. Then in the New Covenant, the observance of the Hebrew Sabbath, Saturday, will no longer distinguish the people of God. Yet under the New Covenant, he says, his people must have a Sabbath day because God engraves on their hearts the very law, the very law he engraved on tables of stone, Jeremiah 31, 33.

The Lord's day resolves this tension." and so we echo the words of the writer to the Hebrews there remains there remains there remains a sabbatism us a Sabbath keeping for the people of God. So as we close, I would like for you to consider the reason why the fourth commandment, Why is it that it always seems to find itself at the center of Christian controversy? What aspects of the day do professing Christians find so unappealing? A day of delight, a day of benefit, a day of delighting in God and doing what he delights in and seeking him. Why is that not appealing?

Why do men think they can perform emergency surgery on this one commandment in order to extract it from the other nine. Is the fourth commandment different than the other nine? Is there something in the Word of God that leads us to believe that it is? Consider with me the following, Exodus 24 12, Exodus 24 12. Then the Lord said to Moses, come up to me on the mountain and be there, and I will give you tablets of stone and the law and commandments which I have written that you may teach them." So, God has tablets of stone upon which he himself has written.

I think we all agree that the writing on the tablets can only be one thing, just the 10 commandments. But note how God refers to that which is written thereon, the law and commandments. The law and commandments. Now, I believe that our King James versions, both the old and new, do us a disservice here. What is in both King James versions is the plural, commandments.

It's not plural in the original language. The ASV, the NASB, and the ESV correctly translated in the singular. Even as it's found in Young's literal translation, God gave Moses the law and the commandment, the law and the commandment, singular. What's the big deal, you may ask? Okay, so it's singular.

What's the big deal? This. The giver of the Ten commandments view these ten, he views these ten as one law and one commandment. One law and one commandment. There is a unity which is conveyed and I along with many others would argue cannot be broken and in many places in the Pentateuch such as Exodus 25 these ten commandments are also referred to as the testimony the law the commandment and the testimony I submit to you that it's not accidental that the Apostle Paul in Romans 7-12 declares in the new covenant time period, therefore The law is holy and the commandment holy and just and good.

And there the King James versions join in with commandment singular. Well, Paul's referring to this. Such is the unity of these ten that James could write to New Testament believers and say there in chapter two, for whoever shall keep the whole law and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. For he who said, Do not commit adultery also said, Do not murder. Now, if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of not one of the laws, You become a transgressor of the law.

On what basis then, my friend, will you remove one of these very commandments from the tables of stone which God Himself inscribed and remove it also from the hearts of new covenant believers where the Holy Spirit writes it. Shall you tear asunder what God has joined together?" My friend, heed the warning of Christ in the Sermon on the Mount. For assuredly I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, One jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 5, 18, and 19. George Swinock wrote, "'Hail, thou that art highly favored of God, thou map of heaven, thou golden spot of the week, Thou market day of souls, thou daybreak of eternal brightness, thou queen of days.

The Lord is with thee, blessed are thou among days. Oh, how do men and women flutter up and down on the weak days as the dove on the waters and can find no rest for their souls till they come to thee their ark till thou put forth thy hand and take them in oh how they sit under thy shadow with great delight and find thy fruits sweet to their taste. O the mountains of mind, the ravishing happiness of heart, the solace of soul, which on thee they enjoy in the blessed Savior. Well, may God make His day, the Christian Sabbath, the Lord's day, such to our souls. Let's pray.

Gracious God, we thank you for your word. Help us to understand it more and more. Give us grace to humble ourselves before it and to be taught and teach us by your spirit and give us ears to hear and hearts to obey. Lord, may we not be those who look into your perfect law of liberty quickly and go our own way and forget what manner of men and women we are, but help us to Look on steadfastly into this law and be changed by it from one degree of glory to another even by the help of your spirit. We pray in Christ's name, amen.

Thank you.