The Fourth Commandment: Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it Holy
The following New Testament references pertain to the Fourth Commandment regarding keeping the Sabbath:
Matthew 12:8, 12; 24:20; Mark 1:21; 2:27-28; 6:2; Luke 4:16, 31; 6:5; 23:56; Acts 13:14, 42, 44; 15:21; 16:13; 17:1-2; 18:4; Hebrews 4:4, 9-10 [Notice the marginal rendering at Hebrews 4:4, 9 in the King James Version or read a modern English translation, most of which make the reference to the Sabbath clear (See the Amplified, ASV, BBE, NASB, NIV, RSV and NRSV translations)].
I believe that though the fourth commandment regarding the Sabbath is mentioned in the NT in narrative context, it is never once cited as a commandment to be kept by those who believe in Christ.
The Sabbath Commandment was given exclusively to the Hebrews, the Jews, and never to the Gentiles, except those Gentiles who resided in Israel or lived among the Jews (Exodus 20:10, “thy stranger (foreigner) that is within thy gates”).
The portion of the Mosaic Law considered to be binding upon the Gentiles is stipulated in the New Testament in the apostolic decision recorded in Acts 15:28, 29,
Act 15:28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;
Act 15:29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.
The Sabbath observance is NOT included among “these necessary things” for the Gentiles, or the Church. Surely, to the Jewish mind, as opposed to the renewed mind of the Christian (Romans 12:1, 2), the Sabbath was a central issue, as was the immediate issue of Circumcision in context.
There is not one example of Christians meeting for specifically Christian worship on the Jewish Sabbath in the New Testament.
There is not one word urging us to keep the Sabbath in any of the apostolic writings in the New Testament.
The Law (all Law) as a principle was nailed to the Cross (Colossians 2:14).
Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
See also Ephesians 2:15,
Eph 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
I have elsewhere read and heard some state that the Mosaic Law was fulfilled and abolished by the work of our Lord Jesus Christ on the cross, but NOT the Ten Commandment Law engraved in stone written by the finger of God.
It sounds like a possible distinction until you read further in the New Testament where Paul states at 2 Corinthians 3:7, 8,
2Co 3:7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:
2Co 3:8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?
The KJV is rather obscure for many modern readers; the English Standard Version for 2 Corinthians 3:7, 8 reads
2Co 3:6 who has made us competent to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
2Co 3:7 Now if the ministry of death, carved in letters on stone, came with such glory that the Israelites could not gaze at Moses’ face because of its glory, which was being brought to an end,
2Co 3:8 will not the ministry of the Spirit have even more glory?
Note Paul states:
(1) The letter kills.
The “letter” has reference to the Law as contained in the Hebrew Scriptures. It “kills” because no one can keep it perfectly (Ecclesiastes 7:20). Only our Lord Jesus Christ has perfectly kept the law. He came to fulfill the law, not destroy it (Matthew 5:17, 18). That does NOT mean the Law still stands.
The issue is that the Hebrew Scriptures state there are two roads to eternal life; one is to perfectly keep the commandments, Leviticus 18:5,
Lev 18:5 Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments: which if a man do, he shall live in them: I am the LORD.
See also Ezekiel 20:11, 13. Luke 10:28. Ro 10:5. Galatians 3:12. As Jesus said once, “this do, and thou shalt live” (Luke 10:28). The other is justification by faith, following the example of Abraham in Genesis 15:6.
Gen 15:6 And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.
(2) The Spirit gives life.
The life spoken of is eternal life, and a regenerated life as a new creation in Christ, which is absolutely not available on the principle of works (you cannot work enough, or never know if you have; besides, Paul tells us we are not saved by our works, but by faith, faith which then produces works pleasing to God, Ephesians 2:8-10).
Paul teaches that if we walk in the Spirit, we shall fulfill the requirements of the Law by the Holy Spirit who lives in the saved believer and produces the fruit of the Spirit Paul details in Galatians 5:22, 23,
Gal 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,
Gal 5:23 gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.
Note carefully what Paul teaches in Galatians 5:18,
Gal 5:18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.
(3) The Law that brings death specifically includes the Ten Commandment Law
That the Law brings death is stated in Romans 6:21 and Romans 7:5,
Rom 6:21 What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death.
Rom 7:5 For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.
2Co 3:7 Now if the ministry of death, carved in letters on stone,
Clearly, it was the Ten Commandments that were carved in letters on stone.
And those Ten Commandments, for those who are depending on keeping them for eternal life, do not bring life, but death.
Some think that because the Sabbath existed before the giving of the Law in the Ten Commandments, the Sabbath Commandment is not included in that which Christ abolished on the Cross. It is true that the Sabbath was probably a pre-Mosaic institution, like the Tithe, but as it is still a matter of Law, it cannot lead to eternal Life. Dependence to any degree whatsoever upon any Law is contrary to Christ,
Gal 5:4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
Gal 5:7 Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth?
Gal 5:8 This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you.
Gal 5:9 A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.
Thus Paul warns an error in what may seem to us a minor matter is deadly serious, spiritually.
Paul does not forbid observing the Sabbath, neither does he encourage it. Paul forbids anyone from criticizing another believer either for observing it, or for not observing it, or for criticizing which day, if any, one chooses as a or the day of worship. See Romans 14:5, 6 and Colossians 2:16,
Rom 14:4 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.
Rom 14:5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
Rom 14:6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it….
Col 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
Col 2:15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.
Col 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
I guess that if someone insists on Sabbath Keeping, they better be keeping the New Moons too!
An interesting passage in Scripture which many very good scholars have mistakenly interpreted to refer to the Sabbath is Revelation 1:10,
Rev 1:10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,
To suppose that the expression used here by John, “on the Lord’s day,” has any reference to the Sabbath is a violation of a simple, standard rule of interpretation. Only later was the expression “the Lord’s day” used of the Sabbath, not in New Testament times. Therefore, it is wrong to assert that this expression as used by John refers to either the original Jewish Sabbath or the somewhat later usage which applies it to the so-called “Christian Sabbath” or Sunday worship.
There is not one line in either the Hebrew or the Greek Scriptures, our Old Testament and New Testament, that indicates the Sabbath was ever changed to a different day. The Sabbath in Scripture as it relates to the fourth commandment always has reference to worship or rest on the Seventh Day, not the First Day. But as Christ rose from the dead in bodily resurrection (there is no other kind of resurrection!) on the First Day, many Christians observe the First Day as the day of worship, in accordance with New Testament Christian practice (Acts 20:7 and 1 Corinthians 16:2).
On a more technical note in reference to Revelation 1:10, some scholars have suggested that the expression “the Lord’s day” in Greek is a reference to the differently expressed “Day of the Lord” in Hebrew.
To me, this would seem to be the best explanation of Revelation 1:10, because it avoids importing a later meaning into the New Testament text. It also seems a better explanation because it fits the context of the book of Revelation, where most of the events depicted there will indeed take place in the future, during “the Day of the Lord.” John thus asserts that what he saw were events to take place in that dreadful time.
So, are we to ignore the Ten Commandments, or the Nine still left? Paul argues we keep the commandments by walking in the Spirit, and so we are not under the Law. The commandments still in full force today are the commands of Christ, which include “love one another,” and what John tells us additionally in 1 John 3:23, 24,
1Jn 3:23 And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.
1Jn 3:24 And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.Rev 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
Dear A. Way,
You comment:
Nothing I have said anywhere on this site or elsewhere can properly be construed to suggest I advocate abandoning the church.
What I have said is that the church is abandoning and failing to reach a good many people. I pointed out that pastors and others in most every church (particularly in churches that sociologically are “village churches”) have a jealousy complex, the sin of pride and envy, which motivates them, whether consciously or unconsciously only God knows the hearts, to reject newcomers, especially if a newcomer is at all knowledgeable about the Bible.
As a result, sociologically, people are going to the Bible themselves independently of any denomination or local church in increasing numbers. George Barna has documented this trend in his studies very recently. If I recall correctly, he projects that in a decade or so the numbers will be reversed from what they are now, namely, 80% attend church, 20% do not, to a future picture of 20% attending church, 80% not doing so, with reference not to the unsaved or worldly people, but to genuinely Bible believing Christians.
I suspect you do not at all understand what Hebrews 10:25 says,
For a starter, the words one another are properly supplied by the figure of speech Ellipsis from the preceding context in Hebrews 10:24. I have linked from Hebrews 10:24, one another, to Romans 12:5, where I give all the occurrences of the underlying Greek word in the cross references I have supplied.
These “one another” references form the basis of a most important subject for Real Bible Study. I suggest you check them out very carefully.
Until you have conducted this study, you really cannot suppose you have any proper understanding of Hebrews 10:25.
Follow this with a careful study of the cross references given at Hebrews 10:25 to the keyword “together,” and it would be well to look up the cross references to each of the individual passages given, even though I did not supply the “+” symbol as often as I now would do, particularly to Malachi 3:16!
And as for Deuteronomy 4:2, you diminish from the Word of God when you overemphasize a particular theme, namely the Sabbath, way out of proportion to its representation in the Epistles of the New Testament, which surely are the primary source of guidance for the polity and doctrine of the Christian church and life.
You have totally violated the hermeneutical rule I posted that pertains to maintaining the balance of doctrine as presented in the whole of Scripture by over-emphasizing in the extreme the matter of the Fourth Commandment.
But worse, you have failed to demonstrate in all your posting here so far that you have ever learned anything new from the study of the Bible that has caused you to change your mind and correct what turns out upon careful study to have been a mistaken viewpoint.
That must mean that you need to spend more time alone on Robinson Crusoe’s Desert Island studying the Bible in plain text format with the help of unbiased non-denominational Bible study tools.
Jesus had a stern warning about that:
The Bible declares where true light comes from:
Addressing another comment you made:
People working in retail, such as retail automotive, like my son are, at least where he works, required to work weekends because the repair facility is open seven days a week, and he is required by his bosses to work when they schedule him to work. He has no choice. They almost never schedule him to be off on Saturday or Sunday.
If any man does not work, neither shall he eat, Paul reminds us.
My son is interested in finding a job where he has the weekends free so he can attend church and meet fellow-believers. When the Lord opens that door, he no doubt will take such a job.
His work situation highlights the problem of injustice I have highlighted in several articles and posts here. That is why unions are such a good thing. When management is left in full control of employees, workers are required to work more hours and more days a week than they really should be with no commensurate increase in their pay, a direct violation of Scripture (Jeremiah 22:13).
Now, as for my knowledge of science, I suspect that my score on the Graduate Record Examination, Advanced Science Test, was equal to or better than yours. I scored in the 88th percentile of all those who majored in science that took that test. I took the test for fun, as a challenge to a science major friend in college who would not believe my claim that I could score higher on that test than he could. Well, he scored in the 85th percentile, so my score was indeed just a bit better than his.
So, unless you happened to score in the top 11 or 12 percent in science, you don’t match my tested knowledge of science on that test.
As for the Graduate Record Examination as a whole, my score was the top or next-to-top score at my university. My debate partner beat me by a tiny fraction. We both got our names in the newspaper as being the top scorers that year on the test. In my own field I scored 600 points above the 99th percentile on the Advanced Test. On the National Teacher Examination I had the top score.
I have studied the matter of “old earth” versus “young earth” interpretation of Genesis since I wrote my high school term paper for senior English on the subject.
I will not renounce the “young earth” position here, but it is probably special pleading which lacks both Biblical and scientific foundation.
Genesis 1:1 tells me God created the heavens and the earth “in the beginning.” Without question, “in the beginning” was a very long time ago, far longer ago than the most generous dating for a “young earth” I’ve yet read about.
There are probably issues of Biblical interpretation that with our present state of knowledge about the meaning of the Bible text, and our understanding of science, are impossible to resolve with certainty and finality.
I did fairly well in courses in physics. We studied light. I’ve read much science since.
The speed of light has been pretty well established at the rough figure of 186,000 miles per second. Using geometry and triangulation in astronomy, the distance of the farthest stars yet discovered is immense, and the length of time for light to travel to us from there involves many “light years,” a number of “years” sufficient to totally discredit the young earth theory.
There have been many different interpretations of Genesis 1 by those who are Christians, some of whom are or were scientists. Some have posited a “gap” between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2. Advocates of this theory marshal many Scriptures to suggest that the original creation by God was perfect, and it became “without form and void” as a result of a catastrophe, perhaps involving casting Satan out of heaven.
Some think the creative “days” were not solar days of our time with 24 hours, but great periods of time. Others think the days were indeed 24 hours, but had long periods of time between them.
Others find Scripture to show God spoke and creation took place instantaneously. Of these, some think the days of Genesis were days of re-creation and restoration.
Still others suggest God created the universe a going concern, such that evidence that seems to indicate great age was built into the result, so what looks like a very ancient universe really is not. At the extreme of this viewpoint, some argue God could have created the earth yesterday, with all the requisite evidence to suggest a past down to the finest details, including our memories.
And there are many more ideas beyond these.
To tell the truth, no one really fully knows either how or exactly (or even approximately) when God created the heavens and the earth.
The point of my high school Senior English research paper was that it is most evident that Moses wrote the Creation Account under the pen of Divine Inspiration, for there is no other way to account that Moses got the order of creation events correct, and even recognized the existence of multiple oceans on earth, vast bodies of waters he surely had never seen. The mathematical probability that Moses could have guessed the order of the creation events is beyond the realm of possibility from a human standpoint.
Fortunately, the matter of “young” versus “old” earth Creation is another of those matters which are not essential to salvation (though I have read statements by young earth advocates that come close to making this issue central). The Lord may let us know the details when we get to be with Him. Until then, let’s face it, we really don’t know much beyond the fact that our Lord Jesus is the Creator and the sustainer of the universe. Since only God can create, and the Bible says Jesus did the creating, I’m satisfied to believe that as my Creator, Jesus is God.
The Bible is clear – “Exodus 20:11 For in six days the LORD made the heavens, the earth, the sea, and everything in them; but on the seventh day He rested. That is why the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and set it apart as holy.”
Do you believe that?
Hm – what is worse, over emphasizing a precept in a topic that is about that precept, or throwing it out all together?
One thing about Sabbath keeping churches, which you did not deny, is there respect to the whole day, and avoiding the sports you complained about…
Young earth – What would Robinson Caruso think after reading the Bible? “For in six days…”.
Yes, the Sabbath points to Creation. #1.
Oh – GRE – yeah, I only scored 3SD above the mean in my science field. But what do tests show? Many times, just knowing the vocabulary, you can do good on tests. As the Bible says, “The wise sometimes go hungry, and the skillful are not necessarily wealthy. And those who are educated don’t always lead successful lives.”
I forgot one this – you should see what Pastors under the age of 40 are reading according to George Barna.
Dear A. Way,
Sounds like you did fairly well on your science test. But remember, I did as well as I said I did, though I was not a science major. I was a Secondary Education major, with my major teaching fields in English and history/social studies/economics, minor teaching field in biology. But I did a lot of serious reading and study in preparation for the GRE, besides the usual required course work.
I don’t know the verse, “The wise sometimes go hungry…” since that isn’t KJV language, but it sounds good.
Robinson Crusoe on his desert island would have no problem with the concept of the “old earth” creationist position. The “young earth” creationist position would not occur to him because that position must make some rather precarious and unsupportable assumptions about matters of Bible chronology and genealogies in the Bible, assumptions he would never think of in response to studying his “three good Bibles,” since they were plain text Bibles.
I have no idea what pastors under 40 are reading. I hope they are reading the Bible, maybe in modern English. They ought to be reading what I have posted here on this site and learn what is meant by Real Bible Study on Robinson Crusoe’s Desert Island.
Overemphasizing a precept to almost the exclusion of all else in Scripture is a major failing of some who over-stress the supposed importance of keeping the Seventh Day Sabbath to Christians who believe in our Lord Jesus Christ.
Paul said in 1 Corinthians 1:14, “I thank God I baptized none of you…” Now some churches, especially the Church of Christ, and to a lesser degree some Baptist churches, overemphasize the ordinance of ritual water baptism. They will even exclude from Communion, and sometimes from fellowship, and surely from church membership those believers who have not been baptized by the mode of immersion.
The Church of Christ makes water baptism a requirement for salvation, arguing in part from the verse, “baptism now saves you,” not to mention their heavy-handed use of Acts 2:38 and Mark 16:15.
So on the rare occasion when I might be confronted by them about water baptism, I confront them with Paul’s statement that he thanked God he had baptized none of the Corinthians. For, if water baptism were essential to salvation he could hardly have said that. Paul even said something about Christ did not send him to baptize, but to preach the gospel (1 Corinthians 1:17), so surely the two are not the same thing, contrary to the Church of Christ’s position in our day.
Besides that, the Baptists and the Church of Christ clearly use the wrong mode of ritual water baptism. The Greek word is a non-modal word, so all modes are acceptable or at least possible, but by example the word is always used of sprinkling or pouring, applying water to the person, not placing the person in the water. Our hearts are “sprinkled,” and bodies “washed,” it reads in Hebrews 10:22. The Holy Spirit was poured out on the day of Pentecost, as I recall.
Anyone familiar with the Bible from careful study on Robinson Crusoe’s Desert Island would surely sense that the Church of Christ is presenting an unbalanced and mistaken doctrine of salvation and baptism.
The Church of Christ is in violation of the hermeneutical rule regarding maintaining the balance of emphasis in doctrine that the Bible does.
Most of the rest of us perceive this to be a problem on the part of the Church of Christ, but probably most of those who belong to the Church of Christ denomination do not perceive this error on their part.
So for those who follow the emphasis of Seventh-day Adventists. Remember that the official teaching of the Seventh-day Adventists places a very great emphasis upon keeping the Seventh Day holy, not the First Day. To them, the First Day does not count. Furthermore, as you have expressed here, those who have heard the “truth” of the Three Angel’s Message and the truth of the importance and requirement of observing the Seventh Day are in deep trouble when the return of Christ takes place if they have not received and obeyed this message.
Yet Paul in at least two places in his epistles warns against letting any one judge or criticize another believer regarding that believer’s choice of day for worship.
As I’ve said repeatedly, though you’ve denied it repeatedly, Paul states, in plain English parlance of today, the day chosen for worship is a non-issue.
Those who make it an issue are guilty of the heresy of Judaizing, a heresy that if persisted in Paul warns will cost you your claim to salvation in Christ and eternal life, for you are fallen from grace. It is what I call the Galatian heresy, the subject of Paul’s letter to Galatians. Another name for some instances of this error is sacerdotalism, though there are technical differences.
A careful reading of Paul’s letters will reveal that he makes very few references to the matter of the Sabbath. If it were as important as you make it out to be, surely Paul would have said a number of very forceful things to admonish Gentile believers to take care to observe the Seventh-day Sabbath in accordance with the Commandments of God. Paul did not do this.
It ought to be a haunting question for you should anyone ask you why this omission in the message of Paul. In fact, it is an omission throughout the whole New Testament.
Paul in Romans, in Galatians, in Ephesians, and even in Colossians (I have been intensively re-studying Colossians 2 today) makes it very plain that we who are “in Christ” are no longer under the Law, no longer subject to ordinances. He said if we walk in the Spirit we are not under the Law.
Paul points out, in so many words, that those who are truly “in Christ” are dead to the Law.
As for Exodus 20:11, you fail to recall what I’ve shown you repeatedly, that the Ten Commandment Law was given ONLY to the Jewish nation.
You also seem to have forgotten that I established that the Sabbath Commandment is the only Commandment of the Ten which clearly is declared in Scripture to be a Type.
Our Lord Jesus Christ fulfilled that Type in full, and this removes all obligation of any believer who is “in Christ” to observe it. Our Lord Jesus Christ has Completed the Sabbath for us who are “in Him,” for He is our Rest, and the Sabbath is Complete. See Matthew 11:29, 30 and Hebrews 4:9, 10.
To insist upon the necessity of observing the Sabbath is heresy, actually apostasy, for such an emphasis constitutes “another Gospel,” which Paul clearly states in Galatians 1 is heresy and apostasy, and of any guilty of same Paul says “let him be accursed.” The original term is anathema, a very strong term (Galatians 1:8).
Paul grants permission for believers to worship on any day of the week they choose. Some choose every day. Some choose Sunday. Some choose Saturday.
Clearly, in the New Testament record, Christian believers met for specifically Christian worship on the First Day. I lately gave you much Scripture to confirm this fact.
A quick search just now of the King James Version for the word “Sabbath” in the book of Acts shows that the word appears just nine times, and not all of those pertain to the Sabbath day itself, but include, for example, the expression “a sabbath day’s journey.”
I suspect the Seventh-day Adventist church claim of 84 instances of Christians worshiping on the Sabbath recorded in the book of Acts may be a bit off mathematically.
In KJV, that would be: “neither yet bread to the wise”
Do you not believe that Bible when is says, “For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is…” ? Is that not clear? I think it would be very clear to Robinson.
And you admit that the precepts were in Genesis before the Jews. So the law preceded the Jews. Yes, it was codified clearly to the COI because they had lost a knowledge of God being in Egyptian captivity.
In your mind you have established this. Simply put, that is not what I read in the Bible.
You mention the SDAs and Church of Christ. Just an FYI, my wife’s cousins are Seventh-day Baptists. And no, I never read an SDA claim the number 84. It was a Messianic Jew. And I think he was off by one, the number is I think 85, but I would have to recount.
I’m also glad you think that sprinkling is adequate. What then did John that Baptist baptize at Aenon? Answer, John 3:23, “because there was much water there”. And this, Acts 8:38 “And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.” So they went down into the water so they could be sprinkled? OK. BTW, Baptism is only a sign. Salvation is only by Jesus, or perhaps I should say, Yahushua.
Dear A. Way,
Thank you for furnishing a clue about what verse you referenced–Ecclesiastes 9:11.
While I own many other English translations, I prefer and use extensively the King James Version, which celebrates its 400th anniversary this year. The King James Version is not perfect, and I find even in my own reading and study that there are now modern English translations which help greatly in grasping the meaning of what in the King James Version English is now an obscure text.
But while I am working on my project to expand the cross references to every verse in the Bible, I am being careful to do most of my reading in the King James Version, since that is the version of the Bible the cross reference keywords are keyed to. I don’t want to be remembering a word from a text of Scripture that cannot be found readily using Strong’s Concordance or the equivalent electronically in my Bible software.
By the way, I just lately read a passage in Scripture that states most clearly that the Law as received by Moses, particularly the Ten Commandments, was NOT previously given to their fathers.
This statement of Moses clearly in context particularly applies to the Ten Commandments, as the immediately following context shows.
Yes, I admit there are evidences of moral concepts or precepts which are similar to what is contained in the Ten Commandments, but these specific commandments were not given before in the manner we read in Exodus 20 or Deuteronomy 5, for the Scripture I quoted above specifically denies they were given previously.
This, of course, Scripturally confirms my assertion that the Fourth Commandment regarding the Sabbath was not given to the Patriarchs. What I found is so clearly stated that Robinson Crusoe on his lonely Desert Island could not have missed this point when he read from his three good plain text Bibles. I did not miss it either.
The fact that Genesis describes the earth’s creation as having taken place in six days does not tell us when that creation was begun beyond the statement “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1). I choose to believe what the Bible clearly states: this took place “in the beginning,” and this no doubt was very long ago.
The Sabbath is declared in Scripture to be a type or shadow. You can read about it in Colossians 2:17, “Which are a shadow of things to come.” A “shadow” is otherwise called a “type.” The weekly Sabbath is included under this term, as is perfectly obvious from what is said in Colossians 2:16. This, of course, also means that the Law of the Sabbath, the Fourth Commandment, has been “blotted out,” has been “taken away,” has been “nailed to the cross” (Colossians 2:14). Paul emphatically removes all obligation to keep it.
Paul also does not forbid observing it as a matter of choice, but he does repeatedly forbid judging anyone regarding this matter. To claim we should keep the Sabbath is a violation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and is “another Gospel,” which Paul clearly labels in Galatians 1 as apostasy. In Romans 14 the context shows that those who observe scruples regarding what they eat or on what days they worship are the “weaker brethren.”
The Sabbath is also clearly called a type in Hebrews 4:8-11. It can also be demonstrated that our Lord Jesus Christ in His earthly ministry recorded in the Gospels likewise regarded it as a type which He fulfilled.
As for John 3:23, that is a mistranslation. John the Baptist baptized there because there was “much water.” The water was needed for sanitary purposes (drinking water) for the large number of people who were coming to him. Properly translated, the underlying Greek should be rendered “many springs,” which also suits the geography of that locality, where there are no large bodies of water, and none sufficient for use for immersion. That immersion was not the mode is clear in context when a controversy arose with John’s disciples about “purifying” (John 3:25), a Jewish rite which was always done by sprinkling or pouring, never by immersion.
There is not a single example in the pages of the Scripture where a person was ever immersed for a religious purpose, not one.
The Greek text, and the geography of Acts 8 (the region was desert) forbid immersion being the mode of Christian baptism here. The chariot literally stopped in the water, which must have been a mere rivulet running across the wilderness road. It was a matter of surprise that water was there, according to the Greek text, and the Ethiopian and Phillip took advantage of the provident opportunity to have Phillip baptize the Ethiopian. You can read the full details in the notes I placed in Acts 8 of The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge.
Baptism is not only a sign, it is a command of Christ, a command that happens to still be in force, unlike the Fourth Commandment, which I have proven from Scripture is not.