Warning: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable in /home/visiodes/ebibleanswers.com/blog/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-plugin/subscribe-widget.php on line 215
Let no man therefore judge you in your sabbath days
Warning: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable in /home/visiodes/ebibleanswers.com/blog/wp-content/plugins/maxblogpress-ping-optimizer/maxblogpress-ping-optimizer.php on line 421
posts | comments

Let no man therefore judge you in your sabbath days

1 comment so far

In our previous article Sabbath, Saturday or Sunday? we discussed what the bible really has to say about the sabbath, the history of the sabbath and a few of the popular arguments sunday-keepers give and what the bible has to say about those arguments. In this article I would like to look at some popular verses in the bible which are used to argue that the sabbath was dtone away at the cross and we no longer need to keep it holy. Part of this also deals with the fact that many Christians feel that the sabbath is somehow associated with the mosaic or ceremonial laws. Is this true? Was the sabbath nailed to the cross?

If you want to see what the bible says about this please join me in this discussion. Your comments are welcomed!

It is surprising to me how many people will base their religious beliefs, and disregard for biblical truths on their interpretation of one verse. The rest of the bible is very clear on the same point, but this one lonely verse appears to be saying something different. So they accept what they believe or what they want to believe over what they know the rest of the bible says… the obvious question is “does the bible contradict itself?”

In 2 timothy 3:16 the bible says:

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness

The bible does not contradict itself so you must be very careful about basing your theology on one verse. Unfortunately not only do many people do this but many churches and many denominations base their theology on one or two verses and teach men to do so. Is this the case with the sabbath?

Let me give you an example of what I am talking about… in our previous article we touched on the idea that the law was done away with at the cross, and we will be discussing that a bit more in-depth in this article.

Many people use this idea to say that we no longer need to keep the sabbath but this idea is based on a few verses which have been taken out of context. Let me use the bible to show you this, afterwards you make your decision.

Colossians 2:14 says:

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;

Christians take this verse and apply it to the ten commandment law, they use it to say that the law of God was nailed to the cross and we are no longer obligated to keep the sabbath… the rest of the ten commandment law is assumed by these same Christians(atleast most of them) to still be binding, but the sabbath according to them is done away with. That is called selective reading, if this verse is indeed saying that the ten commandment law was done away with than it is now okay to murder, steal, commit adultery or lie. For if the sabbath is no longer binding because of this verse then neither are the rest of the commandments… how far do you take it?

This verse however is in fact not referring to the ten commandment law… where else in the bible do you see the ten commandment law so referenced, as “the handwriting of ordinances”? But before we go into investigating the two laws and which was done away with, I want to take a look at a popular argument against keeping the sabbath.

Let no man judge you therefore…
Colossians 2:16 says

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

Notice these keywords are all lumped together as if they fit together… “in meat, or in drink” fits into the sacrificial system and if you read the books of Moses you will see this phrase repeated many times in reference to the sacrifices of “meat and drink” – Some Christians will claim that this verse however is saying that it doesn’t really matter what day you keep, don’t judge others based on their “sabbaths”. Some will take it even further and say it doesn’t matter what you eat or drink anymore. Okay, it does say sabbath so one could get that idea, but the fact that the verse also says “new moon” and “sabbath days” plural, should lead you to a wholly different conclusion, such as that the author is referring again to the sacrificial system where holy days, and yearly sabbaths were kept by the Jews. This fits perfectly into the context while the seventh day sabbath doesn’t fit at all into this verse for the seventh day sabbath is in no way associated with the new moon and in no way associated with the other aspects of what is being described.

There are two kinds of sabbaths in the bible. The seventh-day Sabbath written by God in the ten commandments and the yearly sabbaths which were kept by the Jews. These verses are speaking of the ceremonial feasts of the Lord, not the seventh day sabbath. The feasts of the Lord were a shadow of Christ’s coming… that is why they were done away with or a better interpretation “fulfilled at the cross”. Sunday-keepers claim these verses speak of the seventh day sabbath… this doesn’t fit in with the sacrificial symbolism and the mosaic law. The sabbath was part of the ten commandment law not the mosaic law, the mosaic law was done away with NOT the ten commandment law. Christians mix the two and that is how they get themselves in trouble.

The seventh day sabbath could not be a “shadow of things to come” as the sabbath was instituted before sin and there could NOT be shadows before sin existed. It doesn’t even make sense, what would the sabbath be a shadow of? And why would people before Christ’s time need rest but those of us after not need rest? Or is it, we just get to pick our own day now? None of this makes sense and whats more it isn’t biblical.

Deuteronomy 4:13, 14 says:

And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone. And the Lord commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments, that ye might do them in the land whither ye go over to possess it

Notice carefully that Moses is making a complete separation between the ten commandment law which “He commanded you”, and the statutes which “he commanded me” to give the people. This is VERY important, any yet so many miss it. Many churches and denominations are making a grave error by co-mingling the two, they do so to place the holy seventh day sabbath in with the “ordinances” which were done away with. Any child can see by this verse that the two are distinctly set apart. The ten commandments were written by God, by His own finger in stone which shows perfection, completeness and the eternal nature of the law. The statutes on the other hand were written by a man(moses) and were not eternally binding.  Does that not all make sense?

2 Kings 21:8 speaks of the law written by moses as a law as well but still shows the distinction between the two

Neither will I make the feet of Israel move any more out of the land which I gave their fathers; only if they will observe to do according to all that I have commanded them and according to all the law that my servant Moses commanded them

Notice again the bible shows the distinction between “I have commanded them” and “Moses commanded them”. The bible reiterates this fact over and over, the two laws were separate and distinct. Look carefully at this verse, it says “Moses commanded them” even though it was God who inspired Moses and told Him what to write, why did God say it was Moses? God was showing distinction between the laws of Israel which were to be kept up till Christ’s death and the law of God which was eternal. Maybe God, all-knowing could for-see this day coming when Christians would claim God’s law was done away with, that is why He made it so clear.

Daniel 9:11 again reiterates this. I keep going over this because so many Christians claim that the laws are the same, they are the same or someone combined and this is a grave error, obviously God inspired the writers of the Bible to make distinctions when speaking of the two laws to shows us something… hello?

Yea, all Israel have transgressed thy law, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against him

Again we see “thy law” and the “law of Moses” the servant of God. It is pretty clear isn’t it? The two are separate and distinct and to put the two together and claim the ten commandment law is nailed to the cross is a grave error perpetuated by the father of lies.

Nobody can deny the distinctions made here in the Bible by divine inspiration and then the distinction made when each of the laws were given… the ten commandments were written by the finger of God on stone. The mosaic law was however given very differently. It was given through Moses:

And Moses wrote this law … And it came to pass, when Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book, until they were finished, That Moses commanded the Levites, which bare the ark of the covenant of the Lord, saying, Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee

Moses wrote the Mosaic law and notice that he commanded the Levites to place it in the pocket, on the side of the ark of the covenant of the Lord. It was not to be placed inside the ark for it was NOT to be equated with the ten commandments, it was not the same law.

Exodus 25:16 says

And thou shalt put into the ark the testimony which I shall give thee

Notice here the testimony or tables of testimony were placed in the ark. So lets take a look at the distinctions between the two laws for a moment:

Different authors, were written on different material, were placed in different locations and had totally different content.

And yet so many are claiming they are one in the same, obviously somebody isn’t reading their bible, atleast not the old testament. In fact there are churches which only give out the new testament, this is so sad as precious truths such as what I am showing you today are lost. The old testament and new testament fit together hand-in-glove, if you leave out the old testament as many churches seem to do you can get many false ideas about which law was done away with… it is crucial we study the WHOLE BIBLE!

Which was against us…
When the writers of the bible speak of the law which was done away with there is a phrase which is almost always seen “which was against us” – now if anybody really thought about this, is the sabbath really against us? It is telling us to rest, now unless your a really lazy fellow who rests all week long you probably won’t argue with an “order” to rest. It is really quite silly to suggest that these verses are speaking of the sabbath when they use a phrase such as “which was against us” –

Lets take a look at the ceremonial ordinances in the mosaic law.

Deuteronomy 31:26 says

Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee.

We see two things, again we see that the mosaic law is placed in the side of the ark and NOT in the ark itself where the ten commandment law was placed. This is significant, if the two laws were related or combined or otherwise to share similiar fates then they would have been placed together. The mosaic law was placed outside however to show it was not an eternal law.

Secondly we see the mosaic law is a “witness against thee”. Wow isn’t that very similiar language to Colossians 2:14 which says “which was contrary to us”? The mosaic law brought with it curses and judgments against those who would disregard it, yet this is not seen in the ten commandments. This is why the ceremonial or mosaic law was considered to be “against them”

How could the ten commandment law be seen as “against them” or “contrary” to them? Notice what Paul says in Romans 7:7

What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

We could interpret thus “What shall we shay then? Is the law against us?? God forbid…” – Paul is saying, the ten commandment law is good, how else would I know what sin is? Also note he quotes the ten commandment law “Thou shalt not covet” in response to lust. It is quite clear he is referring to the ten commandment law here.

Paul goes on in verse 12 to say:

Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.

and then in verse 14

For we know that the law is spiritual:

Notice Paul says “the law IS holy” and not “was”. Don’t you think if the ten commandment law was abolished at the cross that it is very strange Paul would be speaking so highly of it? I mean, he is speaking as though the law is still binding. So at this point, Paul while writing to the Roman church speaks of the law as being very much intact and binding.

On the other hand Paul when speaking of the mosaic law says “WAS against us” – It is clear he is speaking of two different laws, the mosaic law WAS against us and WAS abolished at the cross while the ten commandment law IS holy, IS just and IS spiritual.

When writing to the Ephesians Paul speaks of the 5th commandment as still being in effect and very much still a commandment…

Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. Honor thy father and mother; which is the first commandment with promise; That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth

Again Paul says “IS the first commandment…” and not “WAS”.

The church in Paul’s day had alot of contention over some of the ceremonial laws such as circumcision. We will start in Acts 15:5

But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

Now we have already established the “law of Moses” is the ceremonial law, the law which was placed in the pocket of the ark. This is confirmed in this same verse by the fact that Paul speaks of a part of the mosaic law, circumcision, which the ten commandments does not speak of. In Corinthians 7:19 we have Paul’s answer to this uprising:

Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God

Paul doesn’t say “…and keeping the commandments of God is nothing” – Paul is again making a distinction here, the commandments of God are still binding, BUT the ceremonial laws and ordinance of circumcision are no longer required.

There are numerous verses in the Bible which reiterate this fact over and over. The Mosaic law and sacrificial system, that which was done away or nailed to the cross, was instituted after sin came into this world while the ten commandment law is eternal and was not as some suggest created at creation. It was in effect before creation and sin…

We continually see the bible reference the mosaic law as “carnal” while the ten commandment law is referenced as “holy” and “spiritual”. Hebrews 7 speaks of this carnal law:

Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life

Obviously a law cannot be “carnal” and “holy” at the same time. This carnal commandment is dealing with the human priesthood found in the mosaic law. When Christ, He was the holy sacrifice and as such the “carnal commandment” or human priesthood and ceremonial laws were done away with. It was no longer needed, it had been fulfilled in Jesus at the cross.

I want you to also take a look at Ezekiel for further confirmation that the sabbath is in no way affiliated with these mosaic laws which were done away with

Because they … had polluted my sabbaths, and their eyes were after their fathers’ idols. Wherefore I gave them also statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby they should not live
Ezekiel 20:24, 25

Look carefully at how Ezekiel words it. He first speaks of two of the ten commandments, the Sabbath and Idolatry, these are both part of the holy ten commandment law. He then goes on and says “I gave them also” and “that were not good

Again, as with the other writers in the bible we see Ezekiel making a distinction between the Sabbath and Idolatry, two of the ten commandments and the mosaic law which is “not good” He says “I gave them also statutes…”. He would not have said ‘also’ had they been the same law. Remember back in Romans 7:12-14 Paul said the ten commandments are “holy” and “spiritual”… in accordance with the other texts already shown in this article we see that the mosaic law is again “not good” and “against us” because of its curses and judgments against Israel’s continued disobedience.

The mosaic law is never equated with the ten commandment law. They are always distinctly identified. Even though the ten commandment law was not written on tablets of stone until Sinai we know that the early patriarchs followed them so it was not just for Israel.

In Genesis 4:7 God says to Cain after he murdered Abel

sin lieth at the door

The bible gives us the definition of sin:

Sin is the transgression of the law

This tells us that there can be no sin unless there is a law, the ten commandment law was before man, and if it were done away with at the cross then there would be no sin… Paul asks “how would I know sin else the law showed me?” – So think about it, how can God accuse Cain of sin unless Cain knew of the ten commandment law which said “thou shalt not kill”? Obviously he knew of the ten commandment law at this time and Cain was not a Jew 😉

So to say that the ten commandment law was done away with at the cross is not biblical.

I want to go back to Colossians 2:14,16 to get the whole picture here… and the bible says:

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;

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:

When you see the word therefore it means “based on what has just been said we must come to this conclusion” – So it should read “based on the fact that the ordinances have been blotted out let no man judge you in…”

Again we see this verse is portraying the law which was nailed to the cross as “contrary to us” and “against us”, as we have seen already the only law which fits this bill is the Mosaic law, the ten commandment law is never described in this way and is not against us.

Doesn’t this all make sense? I mean to say we don’t have to keep the ten commandment law anymore just doesn’t make any sense, we all know we need a moral code to live by and if we don’ have the ten commandments we won’t know what sin is, and if we don’t know what is sin, then anything is okay… do you see how satan is working to break down God’s holy law?
The bible is however clear that we are still to keep the ten commandments. Read Matthew 5:17-19

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

1 John 2:1 says:

And hereby we do know that we know Him, if we keep His Commandments

The bible is clear, very clear that the ten commandment law is binding, we are to follow it, 100% of it.

But let met go back once more to Colossians 2:14,16

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;

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 want us to take a very close look at these verses and look at them with an open mind, so that God may show us the truth.

Again we notice the verse is NOT distinctly separated, remember we established that the Bible ALWAYS when discussing the Mosaic law and Ten Commandment law at the same time will distinctly separate them… no distinctions are made here, so it is clear that the mosaic law is under discussion here and not the 4th commandment at all… how do we know? Well does the ten commandment law speak of “meat”, or “drink”? No but the mosaic law deals with everything mentioned here, in fact if we cross reference with Leviticus and other books speaking of the ceremonial sacrifices and feast days we see the EXACT same language…

The ceremonial law required animal sacrifices(meat). This “handwriting of ordinances” was a continual witness “against” Israel because its very existence testified that Israel had broken the Ten Commandments. Because of this the needed to offer lambs as sacrifice for their sins. When Jesus died, this entire system of ceremonial sacrifices was “blotted out.”

I want to take a look at Leviticus23:27,28 in discussion of the ceremonial feasts:

These are the feasts of the LORD, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, to offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD, a burnt offering, and a meat offering, a sacrifice, and drink offerings, every thing upon his day:

Beside the sabbaths of the LORD, and beside your gifts, and beside all your vows, and beside all your freewill offerings, which ye give unto the LORD.

Notice we see all the parts of Colossians 2:16 – We have “in meat”, “in drink” and we have “sabbath days” and we KNOW that Leviticus is talking about the Mosaic law here, if you have any doubts read the chapter. It speaks of all the feasts, and ceremonies of Israel… it is clear now that Colossians is speaking of the ceremonial feasts and sacrifices and not the Sabbath of the ten commandments.

Is there anyway this verse in Colossians 2:16 is speaking of the seventhy day sabbath in reference to “sabbath days”? I believe the Bible explains that there is not. And i’ll explain why… they are clearly defined as “shadows of things to come.” – Keep in mind the Seventh-day Sabbath was instituted before sin came into this world, THERE COULD NEVER BE TYPES OR SHADOWS BEFORE SIN EXISTED for the shadows were introduced because of sin and pointed forward to the time of deliverance from sin when Christ would die. For example in the sacrificial system the lambs being slain represented THE LAMB which was coming to take away our sins, they were a type or symbol of Christ’s death.

There is no way the seventh-day sabbath fits into this, it could not be a shadow of anything to come… so what “sabbaths” are these verses speaking of? There were yearly sabbaths which had absolutely no correlation to the Seventh-day Sabbath of the decalogue. And they were most certainly a part of the “ordinances” and system which was done away with at the cross.

To prove this lets go back to Leviticus, in 23:24 we find the following:

Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, In the seventh month, in the first day of the month, shall ye have a sabbath, a memorial of blowing of trumpets, an holy convocation

In verses 27 and 32 we read again:

Also on the tenth day of this seventh month there shall be a day of atonement … It shall be unto you a sabbath of rest

These sabbaths fell on a different day of the month every year and were not to be confused with the seventh-day sabbath, we see this in verses 37 and 38:

These are the feasts of the Lord, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, to offer an offering made by fire unto the Lord, a burnt offering, and a meat offering, a sacrifice, and drink offerings, everything upon his day: BESIDE THE SABBATHS OF THE LORD

In light of this we can now understand more clearly what Paul was talking about when he was speaking of meat and drink and sabbath days which are shadows of things to come. For each of these yearly feast days, there were prescribed offerings, which were shadows pointing clearly to the future sacrifice of Christ. The Bible again as before distinctly separates these from the ten commandment sabbath law by saying “beside the sabbaths of the Lord.” or the seventh day sabbath.

At the death of Christ the veil of the temple was torn from top to bottom, this exposed the most holy place of the sanctuary, where there was sprinkled the blood of the sins of the people. But it was needed no more, no more lambs needed to die, the true Lamb of God had come to which all those other sacrifices had been pointing. And to continue to sacrifice animals would be a denial of Christ’s coming and His death, as our Lamb for our sins. It would be denying the fulfillment of all the shadows and types which pointed to Christ. Henceforth it would be “against us” or “contrary to us” to continue to keep the Mosaic law. The tearing of the veil from top to bottom was a symbol of the obliteration of the mosaic law. Isn’t that pretty clear?

We have already established that after the cross, Paul when writing of the ten commandment law he says it “IS holy”. Obviously, the blotting out of ordinances, types and shadows did not affect the great moral code of the Ten Commandments in the slightest degree—they all applied after the cross as much as before Christ died. Christ did not come to glorify sin by obliterating His holy law so we can continue in sin… God forbid, instead He came to “magnify” the law not destroy it. I keep going over and over this because so many people claim that somehow the Sabbath has been done away with at the cross, so I have attempted to clearly present the truth of the Word. Please, “search the scriptures” and find the truth for yourself.

There are still Christians today who will insist that the yearly Sabbaths should be observed along with the weekly Sabbath.  This is an attack by Satan on God’s holy law for if we still need to keep the yearly sabbaths than what was done away with? – please note I am not condemning anyone who believes this way, I am showing you why I think it can be a hindrance –  What Sabbaths where blotted out at the cross? And what was the “holyday” mentioned by Paul as being abolished along with those “sabbath days which were shadows of things to come” The Greek word for “holyday” is heorte, which is also used to designate one of the yearly festivals of the Jews:

After this there was a feast (heorte) of the Jews; and Jesus went up to Jerusalem”
John 5:1.

This is unquestionably one of the holy days that Paul spoke of as being abolished at the cross. In contrast, the weekly Sabbath is never referred to as a “feast”, or the greek word (heorte) for feast used in conjunction with it. Neither is it ever connected to the Jews by such terms as “sabbath of the Jews.” It is only designated as the “sabbath of the Lord.” and if we claim to serve the Lord then we should want to worship on His day, right? Its not about keeping the Sabbath because its a law but because of why God made the Sabbath.

What we have concluded here is confirmed by many many Bible commentators (including Adam Clarke and Albert Barnes) who agree that Paul is not talking about the Ten Commandments being abolished at the cross. Dwight L. Moody, Dr. C. I. Schofield and Billy Graham also strongly affirm that the law abolished at the cross was the ceremonial law. Anyone who studies this out has to come to this conclusion for it is all there, the Bible is very clear about it. If your wondering “why didn’t I see this sooner”, please keep in mind that God doesn’t always dump all the truth on us at once, many times He unfolds His plans step by step.

We will keep sabbath in heaven…

And it shall come to pass, [that] from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD

One of the strongest arguments for the Sabbath is the fact that we will be keeping it in heaven… think about it, if we will be keeping the Sabbath in heaven why would it not be important down here? Keep in mind that the Sabbath is called a “day of rest”, we won’t need rest in heaven. So it must be that the Sabbath is much more important than just a day to cease rest. And don’t you think that if we will be keeping the Sabbath in heaven that it must still be very much part of God’s holy law? Another striking blow against the idea that the sabbath was done away with at the cross is Christ’s admonish to those in the end time (paralleled in the prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem) in Matthew 24:

But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the Sabbath day:

If the sabbath is not important why did Christ advise His disciples to pray that their flight would not be on the Sabbath?  This was years after the death of Christ, didn’t His followers know at that time that the Sabbath was abolished? Not only did they not know it but apparently Christ didn’t either. The fact is all through the Bible the ten commandment law AS WELL AS the sabbath are presented as holy and unchanging. Satan hates the ten commandments and hates God’s sabbath and He attempts by getting Christians to disobey his law and Sabbath show that Christians cannot truly keep His law… God is unfair… that is what it all boils down to.
The bible says in Revelation 11:19:

And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament: and there were lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great hail.

I wonder if God has the simplified version, the copy with the 4th missing. I don’t mean to be sarcastic or rude here but here is my point and conclusion; perhaps you have followed this article thus far and you are like “yeah okay, it seems to line up but what is the point? Why is it important which day we keep?” – and it is a good question. We have covered alot of ground here and I don’t mean to boar you but I wish to explain the single most important reason why the Sabbath is important.

God has the testament or ten commandment law in his ark in heaven… this ought to tell you something about the eternal nature of the law. But think about this awful scenario—IF THE LAW THAT WAS IN THE ARK WAS ABROGATED AT THE CROSS, CHRIST IS MEDIATING FOR THE TRANSGRESSION OF AN OBSOLETE LAW! Keep in mind John is beholding this in vision, many years after the cross. Obviously is the ten commandment law had been done away with then it would not have been seen in John’s vision. If the law was done away then what would Christ be judging them based on? He could not judge them if the law was obliterated so the ten commandment law must be very much still intact.

James 2:10 says the WHOLE LAW MUST BE OBEYED!

For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law.

So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.

No Christian has ever found fault with nine of the commandments. Why would they want to get rid of the fourth commandment? Obviously because they are breaking it and do not want to believe that they stand condemned by it. So they must believe that the whole law was done away with and somehow afterwards reinstated as 9… that is an invention of the devil himself and has absolutely no biblical backing. How can anybody take away the fourth commandment from the Ten Commandments and still call it a “whole law”.

There is no room for removing one or part of the commandments, the Bible is clear, we must obey the WHOLE law, for if we offend in one point we have broken it all… could it be that if we knowingly disobey the sabbath we are transgressing God’s whole law?

Incidentally for those still clinging to the idea that the Sabbath was for the old testament and was not in effect in the new testament, the Sabbath is mentioned more times in the new testament than ANY of the other nine.

Could there be a reason to believe that the Sabbath contains a testing quality that cannot be found in any of the other nine commandments? Could it be that the Sabbath is the big test in the end times whether we will follow Christ or the mark of the beast? Think about it, the sabbath is really the only commandment which there is no stigma attached to breaking it. For instance if you kill somebody your going to go to jail. There are state and universal laws which condemn a man for stealing, killing etc. But there are no laws which tell you to keep the sabbath, in fact the majority of people keep Sunday over the Sabbath. Therefore, it would constitute a special test of genuine love for Christ for you to keep the sabbath.

Lets take a quick look at Revelation 14:12:

Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

In the end times, the test will be those who keep the commandments of God, the WHOLE ten. This will be the big test, will we follow what God says or when the Sunday law comes will we keep Sunday because it is easier?

Proof that the sabbath remains in effect

As a little background, we need to examine the thrust of the whole book of Hebrews. Paul in writing this letter is showing the number of elements of the old covenant have been taken away. We can almost feel the anguish of the Hebrew believers as Paul explains to them how the sacrificial system has been taken away, having been fulfilled in Christ. The Levitical priesthood has been removed, being replaced by Christ our High Priest. Were they waiting fearfully to hear him take away the Sabbath also? If so, they must have been tremendously relieved when he wrote these words, “There remaineth therefore a ‘keeping of the sabbath’ to the people of God” Hebrews 4:9. I am using the marginal reading of the King James Version because that is the exact, literal meaning of the original statement.

The context of Hebrews three and four does not indicate that Paul was trying to convince the Hebrew Christians which day to keep holy. They already knew that. His great burden was for them to enter into a spiritual relationship with Christ—to have an experience of rest from the works of sin. He proved that the children of Israel did not find that true rest because of their lack of faith and disobedience in the wilderness.

Think about it, Sabbath-keeping really parallels the salvation experience. What makes something holy? In Isaiah 58:13 we find God calls the Sabbath “my holy day” and “a delight.” It is indeed the presence of god in something which makes it holy. We see this in the burning bush incident with Moses, God’s presence in the bush made it holy, God’s presence is in the Sabbath just as He is also manifested in the life of a genuine Christian.

It is no coincidence that the same Hebrew word, CHASID, is used in Isaiah 58:13 to describe the Sabbath “my HOLY day” as well as in Leviticus 19:2 to describe God’s people “ye shall be HOLY.” God dwells in the Sabbath as well as in His people, hence both are called “holy.” God gave us the Sabbath, from the beginning, as a sign of sanctification.

Moreover also I gave them my sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the Lord that sanctify them
Ezekiel 20:12

And I am sure someone will raise their hand and say “but the sabbath is only a sign of holiness for the jews” – Thats not what the Bible says:

if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise
Galations 3:29

All born-again Christians are part of spiritual Israel and the Sabbath is for them as well as it was for the Jews of old.

This is reaffirmed in the new testament again by Paul in his statement in Hebrews 4:9,10.

the keeping of the sabbath remains for God’s people

He also commands us to rest from our works “as God did from His”

If you still aren’t satisfied that Paul is talking about the Sabbath and still feel that it is only for the Jews maybe a confirmation from a sunday-keeper would help you

Jamieson, Fausset and Brown in their commentary on the bible make this comment on Hebrews 4:9, “This verse indirectly establishes the obligation of the Sabbath still” (page 449). It is very interesting that these Sunday-keeping theological scholars, with the highest of linguistic credentials present this same truth.

Its there friends, we have established that the Ten Commandment law and the Mosaic law are very different and not to be interpreted or equated as one. We have discovered that the mosaic law was temporary and was THE LAW THAT WAS NAILED TO THE CROSS. We found that the veil of the temple was torn from top to bottom to symbolize the end of the sacrificial system and the mosaic and ceremonial laws.
We found that moral ten commandment law, encased in the ark of the testimony, like the rest of the wilderness sanctuary,s a copy of the true pattern in heaven. We also affirm that it was not only repeated and reinforced in the New Testament but identified in John’s vision as beneath the mercy seat in the heavenly sanctuary, from which Christ ministers His own blood for our transgressions. From that foundational position, it continues to be the basis for Christ’s intercessory ministry for us in the throne room of heaven. Therefore, it is established as the most unmovable and unchangeable of all God’s decrees.

Conclusion of the whole matter…

When Solomon finishes Ecclesiastes he ends with this:

Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. For God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil”

Now I didn’t quote this verse to say “See, it says ‘keep His commandments'”, the reason I quoted it is because the conclusion is we must “fear God”, not in the common English sense of the word but in the original sense where it means to reverence and stand in awe of. Why is the Sabbath important? Why does it matter what day we keep? The truth is the day doesn’t matter, what does matter is that Christ hallowed it. The seventhy-day is only important because God said, “I will set this day apart for me to commune with my people” and that is why He hallowed it. He made the day holy because He wanted a special time set aside each week for us to come and worship Him.
In this context it is truly a matter of worship, the Sabbath is all about worship.  Christ came to this earth and died for you and me because He loved us that much, it is that same love that sought to create a day sanctified for the sole purpose of His people coming to Him each week. It should not be a requirement but rather a joy, we should have such love for Him for what He did that we will not be able to wait for Sabbath to come. THAT is what Sabbath was meant to be and I hope that that is what Sabbath can come to mean in your life as well as my own.

In the garden of Eden two institutions were created holy, that of the Sabbath and marriage. Today both of those are being attacked at the very core, the very ideals and holiness of marriage is being attack and blatantly disregarded in the name of “equality”, sinful unions between same-sex couples is becoming more and more prevalent and that under the name of “marriage”. Likewise Sunday is proclaimed as the “Lord’s day” when the Bible clearly calls the Seventh-day that. The fact is friends, Satan hates our Lord and He seeks to attack Him but destroying the two most important institutions God created… btw God created these two institutions because He loved us and desires our happiness.  What do you say? Should we not respect God enough to keep the day He created and hallowed? Should we respect it any less than marriage? Believe me God doesn’t…

So the conclusion is this, if my Jesus went to Calvary for me because of the love He had for me then the Sabbath must be very important to Him because it is a time when He can come together with His people, the people He died for.  I thank God for that… and for that reason the Sabbath is a sincere blessing to me.


I apologize for the long article, I also apologize if I have seemed harsh in this article. It is hard for me to express on page what would be easily expressed in words, where sincerity and love can be seen in a face it is hard to be discerned in a printed page. So I apologize if anything I have said has come across harsh or anything other than Christ would condone. I write this article not to just  prove that the Sabbath is binding but show why it is, if you understand that I have no doubts that you will WANT to keep it like I do. Because I firmly believe you are as sincere as I am and that you want to follow God wherever He leads.

May God Bless you as you study His word, please write me at randy[at]ebibleanswers[dot]com

Friday, January 4th, 2008 at 8:15 pm and is filed under Sabbath/Sunday, papal church, General Bible Questions, Seal of God. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

One Response to “Let no man therefore judge you in your sabbath days”

  1. Posted by Truth Seeker 30th August, 2010 at 9:42 pm

    Not to mess your flow up- but the Mosaic Laws were fulfilled by Yeshua- and He never said theyre done away with…

    check this link out…


Leave a reply

Web Analytics