philadelphos
Sydney
The purpose of sabbath, or any aspect of the OT for that matter, does not fit into the supercessionist framework. Many early Christian writings portray the NT and the Church as superseding the OT and ‘old Israel’, subsequently fueling anti-Jewish sentiment and devaluation of the OT.
Attacks on the OT, old covenant, Torah and Decalogue, with a bent for covenant supremacism reflects a supercessionist stance. It is covenant elitism (Christian elitism). Without establishing that and the conflict of interest there can be no productive discussion on the ‘purpose of sabbath’. ’Christianity’ is a Judeo-Christian religion, it is not separate or autonomous. Not supposed to be sectarianism.
About natural vs wild.
Paul in Rom 11 draws the distinction between the “natural” (φύσις; phúsis; Rom 11:21) branches and “wild olive shoot” (ἀγριέλαιος; agriélaios; 11:17) in Rom 11.
Absolutely, there is no superiority in the New Covenant (people). Gentiles are indeed more vulnerable as saplings. In perspective, Jacob lived 1836- 1689 BC.
Quoting Schaser: “While the natural branches on the tree have been “broken” (ἐκκλάω; ekkláo), Paul warns that the unnaturally grafted Gentile branches will be “cut off” (ἐκκόπτω; ekkópto) if they aren’t careful (11:22).” Are Gentiles Grafted into Israel? - Israel Bible Weekly
IOW, ‘branches of faith’ are ‘body parts’ in the ‘body of Christ’, one cannot live without the other. One is ‘old’ the other ‘young’. Neither is superior, although each has it’s strengths and weaknesses.
Matthew Henry: “First, The privilege which the Gentiles had by being taken into the church. They were grafted in (v. 17), as a branch of a wild olive into a good olive, which is contrary to the way and custom of the husbandman, who grafts the good olive into the bad; but those that God grafts into the church he finds wild and barren, and good for nothing. Men graft to mend the tree; but God grafts to mend the branch.” (on Romans 11)
The purpose of sabbath functions to unite both groups, all body parts under God in collective memorial. Weekly and eternally. A physical and spiritual economy in worship/praise/hallel. Christ being central, seated within Jerusalem. All other kingdoms facing him.
The institution of Sabbath in that regard functions to mend ‘the good for nothing Gentiles’. Hence “the sabbath was made for man”.
Sabbath is non-mandatory, unenforced, because it is a privilege not a right. Gentiles are entitled to nothing, but by God’s grace that there is a chance at new life. “Through Christ”, which does not come at the expense of the ’Holy Scripture’.
Sabbath is not Christ nor is it salvific but as 'Lord of the Sabbath' it is the boat he is on. Just as Peter walked on water, it was not accomplished of his own ability but by the administration of Christ, that he had power over the law of nature and the creation ordinance.
When a new employment contract is given to a new staff member, is he/she superior to the older staff and do they disrespect office protocol/policy? All are dependent on the same boss. The new worker might have certain perks, office with a view, higher pay, but also higher expectations, and are vulnerable to LIFO, last in first out.
Historically, when supercessionism was introduced it quickly turned anti-semitic, burning down synagogues throughout Europe, “Set fire to their synagogues or schools” (Luther, Jews and their Lies), which ofc contained hand-written scrolls of Sefer Torah used at weekly Sabbath readings. Desecration, sacrilege, blasphemy. If Gentiles were given their way, we’d be under a Cromwellian dictatorship.
Kelly McDonald, Jr: “Many people are not aware that Martin Luther was also confronted with the issue of the Sabbath. In fact, at the same time Luther’s reformation movement began there was also a movement to return to the seventh-day Sabbath” (Martin Luther and the Sabbath, Martin Luther and the Sabbath)
Luther and Karlstadt (I agree with Karlstadt).
Quote:
In the midst of this attempt to reform the Roman Church, Luther was confronted regarding the Sabbath question. Luther had a close friend named Andreas Karlstadt; they disagreed with each other in two key areas. Karlstadt believed Luther should accept 1) condemning of idols and images as the second commandment decrees and 2) the Sabbath. We have two quotes from him below:
“God laid out before us all commandments and prohibitions to make us aware of our inner image and likeness, and to understand how God created us in his image to become as God is, i.e., holy, tranquil, good, just, wise, strong, truthful, kind, merciful, etc. All commandments of God demand of us to be godlike; in fact, they have been given us so that we might be conformed to God” (Karlstadt, Regarding The Sabbath and other Statutory Holy Days, Section 2).
“If servants have worked for six days, they are to have the seventh day off God says without distinction, ‘Remember to celebrate the seventh day.’ He does not say that we must keep Sunday or Saturday as the seventh day. It is no secret that human beings instituted Sunday. As for Saturday, the matter is still being debated” (ibid, Section 10).
The challenge is recognising that Gentiles (believers/elect) are Jews, and yet realising that the classifications are unimportant: “There is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.” (Col 3:11)
“For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly (κρυπτῷ krypto); and circumcision is that of the heart (καρδίας kardias), in the spirit (ἐν πνεύματι en pneumati), and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.” (Rom 2:28-29)
Sabbath like circumcision (and other ‘Judaistic’ practices) must work the same way, “inwardly” and “of the heart”, less “observing days, and months, and times, and years” (Gal 4:10). Without reliance on rabbinical council or ecclesiastical councils. Without tension/competition between the ‘letter of the law’ vs the ‘spirit of the law’. Having the ability to enact the intent behind the law, without spiritual anxiety, without breaking commandments.
e.g. Restaurant ministries here preach on Mondays, workers have one day off, not two, so it could be said that they cherish sabbath and love Christ as their free-time is so precious and limited. Proportionally.
‘Breaking’ vs ‘keeping’.
Rom 2:25-26 says, “For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?”
By that logic, sabbath-breaking or sabbath-keeping is negligible to “keeping the righteousness of the law”, per Paul’s examples of theft, adultery, idolatry/sacrilege, he is ono doubt quoting the Decalogue.
Cutter:
The approach to a Christian theology of Israel that is judged to be most adequate (both for the project of recovering a Christian Sabbath and for the demands of Christian orthodoxy) is neither supersessionism nor a “two covenant” model, but a “fulfillment” model, such as that laid out recently by Jean-Miguel Garrigues. Principles are drawn from Garrigues’s account of Israel and the Church that are then applied to a Christian understanding of the Sabbath. These principles are also applied to a reading of Rabbi Abraham J. Heschel’s The Sabbath: Its Meaning for Modern Man, with the goal of respecting the text’s Jewish integrity while allowing it to be instructive for Christians. A result of this reading of Heschel is the observation that the Sabbath provides a “middle way” between single-minded attention to eternity and succumbing to the totalizing demands of “technical civilization. ...The Sabbath is considered through the lens of metaphysical realism, linking practical observance with spiritual meanings, which would also provide a fuller context for the economic ethics (developed elsewhere) to which the Sabbath points.” (Abigail Woolley Cutter, A Renewed Christian Sabbath, After Supersessionism and After Christendom, https://scholar.smu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1035&context=religious_studies_etds)
Quote:
“The command to observe Sabbath has undoubtedly been the most difficult for Christians to interpret … Christian accounts of Sabbath have had to ask just how Jewish the commandment is — and how Jewish we are (or, better put, whether we are part of Israel in any meaningful way). Answers to these questions have been too wide-ranging to survey … We can categorize these broadly as literal Sabbaths (sabbatarianism) and spiritualized Sabbaths — of which each is appealing, but neither is satisfactory. …Since Christianity became a mainly Gentile religion, however, the dominant Christian treatment of Sabbath has been to spiritualize it. While the Jews had needed to keep the law of Moses in a physical way (“unspiritual” as Christians often thought them), Christians could advance straight to the spiritual meaning. St. Augustine, who made Sabbath a cornerstone of his theology, said that Sabbath-keeping meant resting in Christ and ceasing from sin. Luther and Calvin both followed suit, teaching that no one day of the week deserved Christians’ special reverence Then we can once again be formed by the fourth commandment. But it had an additional meaning: Christians must refrain from trying to please God by their own efforts. Calvin thought much the same, using the term “mortification” for the spiritual disposition of relying on grace alone. While Calvin gave Mosaic law more credit than Luther did — he saw this spiritual lesson in Sabbath from its start — he too believed that Christians did not need to observe a literal Sabbath in order to benefit from its spiritual meaning. … As I see it, neither the spiritualized Sabbath nor strict sabbatarianism is clearly the right choice for Christians, although each has its appeal. The spiritual Sabbath has support in the New Testament (think of the book of Hebrews, especially); but if the Sabbath is only spiritual, it loses much of the clout it had for Israel” (The Fourth Commandment: The Sabbath — Fulfilled But Not Obsolete – Covenant)
Garrigues' principle: “A principle we can take from Garrigues is that fulfillment does not mean obsolescence. Indeed, as Jesus, Paul, the author of Hebrews, and St. Augustine insist, Christians should see Jesus as the fulfillment of Sabbath. But rather than taking this to mean that we do not need to attend to the Sabbath, we can do the opposite: learn more about Christ by learning about the Sabbath he is supposed to have fulfilled. The more we are formed by the Sabbath, the more we will be formed by Christ.”
“The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple.” (Ps 19:7)
grace and peace
Attacks on the OT, old covenant, Torah and Decalogue, with a bent for covenant supremacism reflects a supercessionist stance. It is covenant elitism (Christian elitism). Without establishing that and the conflict of interest there can be no productive discussion on the ‘purpose of sabbath’. ’Christianity’ is a Judeo-Christian religion, it is not separate or autonomous. Not supposed to be sectarianism.
About natural vs wild.
Paul in Rom 11 draws the distinction between the “natural” (φύσις; phúsis; Rom 11:21) branches and “wild olive shoot” (ἀγριέλαιος; agriélaios; 11:17) in Rom 11.
Absolutely, there is no superiority in the New Covenant (people). Gentiles are indeed more vulnerable as saplings. In perspective, Jacob lived 1836- 1689 BC.
Quoting Schaser: “While the natural branches on the tree have been “broken” (ἐκκλάω; ekkláo), Paul warns that the unnaturally grafted Gentile branches will be “cut off” (ἐκκόπτω; ekkópto) if they aren’t careful (11:22).” Are Gentiles Grafted into Israel? - Israel Bible Weekly
IOW, ‘branches of faith’ are ‘body parts’ in the ‘body of Christ’, one cannot live without the other. One is ‘old’ the other ‘young’. Neither is superior, although each has it’s strengths and weaknesses.
Matthew Henry: “First, The privilege which the Gentiles had by being taken into the church. They were grafted in (v. 17), as a branch of a wild olive into a good olive, which is contrary to the way and custom of the husbandman, who grafts the good olive into the bad; but those that God grafts into the church he finds wild and barren, and good for nothing. Men graft to mend the tree; but God grafts to mend the branch.” (on Romans 11)
The purpose of sabbath functions to unite both groups, all body parts under God in collective memorial. Weekly and eternally. A physical and spiritual economy in worship/praise/hallel. Christ being central, seated within Jerusalem. All other kingdoms facing him.
The institution of Sabbath in that regard functions to mend ‘the good for nothing Gentiles’. Hence “the sabbath was made for man”.
Sabbath is non-mandatory, unenforced, because it is a privilege not a right. Gentiles are entitled to nothing, but by God’s grace that there is a chance at new life. “Through Christ”, which does not come at the expense of the ’Holy Scripture’.
Sabbath is not Christ nor is it salvific but as 'Lord of the Sabbath' it is the boat he is on. Just as Peter walked on water, it was not accomplished of his own ability but by the administration of Christ, that he had power over the law of nature and the creation ordinance.
When a new employment contract is given to a new staff member, is he/she superior to the older staff and do they disrespect office protocol/policy? All are dependent on the same boss. The new worker might have certain perks, office with a view, higher pay, but also higher expectations, and are vulnerable to LIFO, last in first out.
Historically, when supercessionism was introduced it quickly turned anti-semitic, burning down synagogues throughout Europe, “Set fire to their synagogues or schools” (Luther, Jews and their Lies), which ofc contained hand-written scrolls of Sefer Torah used at weekly Sabbath readings. Desecration, sacrilege, blasphemy. If Gentiles were given their way, we’d be under a Cromwellian dictatorship.
Kelly McDonald, Jr: “Many people are not aware that Martin Luther was also confronted with the issue of the Sabbath. In fact, at the same time Luther’s reformation movement began there was also a movement to return to the seventh-day Sabbath” (Martin Luther and the Sabbath, Martin Luther and the Sabbath)
Luther and Karlstadt (I agree with Karlstadt).
Quote:
In the midst of this attempt to reform the Roman Church, Luther was confronted regarding the Sabbath question. Luther had a close friend named Andreas Karlstadt; they disagreed with each other in two key areas. Karlstadt believed Luther should accept 1) condemning of idols and images as the second commandment decrees and 2) the Sabbath. We have two quotes from him below:
“God laid out before us all commandments and prohibitions to make us aware of our inner image and likeness, and to understand how God created us in his image to become as God is, i.e., holy, tranquil, good, just, wise, strong, truthful, kind, merciful, etc. All commandments of God demand of us to be godlike; in fact, they have been given us so that we might be conformed to God” (Karlstadt, Regarding The Sabbath and other Statutory Holy Days, Section 2).
“If servants have worked for six days, they are to have the seventh day off God says without distinction, ‘Remember to celebrate the seventh day.’ He does not say that we must keep Sunday or Saturday as the seventh day. It is no secret that human beings instituted Sunday. As for Saturday, the matter is still being debated” (ibid, Section 10).
The challenge is recognising that Gentiles (believers/elect) are Jews, and yet realising that the classifications are unimportant: “There is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.” (Col 3:11)
“For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly (κρυπτῷ krypto); and circumcision is that of the heart (καρδίας kardias), in the spirit (ἐν πνεύματι en pneumati), and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.” (Rom 2:28-29)
Sabbath like circumcision (and other ‘Judaistic’ practices) must work the same way, “inwardly” and “of the heart”, less “observing days, and months, and times, and years” (Gal 4:10). Without reliance on rabbinical council or ecclesiastical councils. Without tension/competition between the ‘letter of the law’ vs the ‘spirit of the law’. Having the ability to enact the intent behind the law, without spiritual anxiety, without breaking commandments.
e.g. Restaurant ministries here preach on Mondays, workers have one day off, not two, so it could be said that they cherish sabbath and love Christ as their free-time is so precious and limited. Proportionally.
‘Breaking’ vs ‘keeping’.
Rom 2:25-26 says, “For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?”
By that logic, sabbath-breaking or sabbath-keeping is negligible to “keeping the righteousness of the law”, per Paul’s examples of theft, adultery, idolatry/sacrilege, he is ono doubt quoting the Decalogue.
Cutter:
The approach to a Christian theology of Israel that is judged to be most adequate (both for the project of recovering a Christian Sabbath and for the demands of Christian orthodoxy) is neither supersessionism nor a “two covenant” model, but a “fulfillment” model, such as that laid out recently by Jean-Miguel Garrigues. Principles are drawn from Garrigues’s account of Israel and the Church that are then applied to a Christian understanding of the Sabbath. These principles are also applied to a reading of Rabbi Abraham J. Heschel’s The Sabbath: Its Meaning for Modern Man, with the goal of respecting the text’s Jewish integrity while allowing it to be instructive for Christians. A result of this reading of Heschel is the observation that the Sabbath provides a “middle way” between single-minded attention to eternity and succumbing to the totalizing demands of “technical civilization. ...The Sabbath is considered through the lens of metaphysical realism, linking practical observance with spiritual meanings, which would also provide a fuller context for the economic ethics (developed elsewhere) to which the Sabbath points.” (Abigail Woolley Cutter, A Renewed Christian Sabbath, After Supersessionism and After Christendom, https://scholar.smu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1035&context=religious_studies_etds)
Quote:
“The command to observe Sabbath has undoubtedly been the most difficult for Christians to interpret … Christian accounts of Sabbath have had to ask just how Jewish the commandment is — and how Jewish we are (or, better put, whether we are part of Israel in any meaningful way). Answers to these questions have been too wide-ranging to survey … We can categorize these broadly as literal Sabbaths (sabbatarianism) and spiritualized Sabbaths — of which each is appealing, but neither is satisfactory. …Since Christianity became a mainly Gentile religion, however, the dominant Christian treatment of Sabbath has been to spiritualize it. While the Jews had needed to keep the law of Moses in a physical way (“unspiritual” as Christians often thought them), Christians could advance straight to the spiritual meaning. St. Augustine, who made Sabbath a cornerstone of his theology, said that Sabbath-keeping meant resting in Christ and ceasing from sin. Luther and Calvin both followed suit, teaching that no one day of the week deserved Christians’ special reverence Then we can once again be formed by the fourth commandment. But it had an additional meaning: Christians must refrain from trying to please God by their own efforts. Calvin thought much the same, using the term “mortification” for the spiritual disposition of relying on grace alone. While Calvin gave Mosaic law more credit than Luther did — he saw this spiritual lesson in Sabbath from its start — he too believed that Christians did not need to observe a literal Sabbath in order to benefit from its spiritual meaning. … As I see it, neither the spiritualized Sabbath nor strict sabbatarianism is clearly the right choice for Christians, although each has its appeal. The spiritual Sabbath has support in the New Testament (think of the book of Hebrews, especially); but if the Sabbath is only spiritual, it loses much of the clout it had for Israel” (The Fourth Commandment: The Sabbath — Fulfilled But Not Obsolete – Covenant)
Garrigues' principle: “A principle we can take from Garrigues is that fulfillment does not mean obsolescence. Indeed, as Jesus, Paul, the author of Hebrews, and St. Augustine insist, Christians should see Jesus as the fulfillment of Sabbath. But rather than taking this to mean that we do not need to attend to the Sabbath, we can do the opposite: learn more about Christ by learning about the Sabbath he is supposed to have fulfilled. The more we are formed by the Sabbath, the more we will be formed by Christ.”
“The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple.” (Ps 19:7)
grace and peace
Upvote
0
