From Creation Rest to Eternal Rest: Assessing the Sabbath for Today

This article originated as a theology paper written for the purpose of my studies with The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Spring 2023.

“Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” (ESV) Matthew 11:28 is a well-known verse and provides a potent summary of a profound theme that runs across the entire Bible. The concept of rest is first introduced at creation and stretches out into eternity. However, the nature and implications of this rest between these two points is far less certain, with the much-debated issue of the Sabbath lying along this thematic highway.

Many Christians have historically understood this theme of rest to require keeping a Christian Sabbath as part of the new covenant today. By assessing this view in light of Scripture, this paper shows that a Christian Sabbath view lacks sufficient biblical support. Instead, it will demonstrate that the Sabbath belonged to the Mosaic covenant, which was fulfilled in its entirety by Christ. As a result, there is no obligation for us to observe the Christian Sabbath today.

This paper begins by introducing the concept of the Christian Sabbath, as set out in the Second London Confession (SLC),[1] summarizing the historical background and key arguments for it. It then examines the Sabbath across the canon, explaining: (1) the Sabbath is typologically connected to rest at creation, (2) but is only an obligation for those under the Mosaic covenant, and (3) this entire covenant has been fulfilled in Christ, who brings about the antitype of eternal rest for his people. This paper concludes by briefly drawing implications from this for today.

The Christian Sabbath

The SLC outlines the following position on the Sabbath in chapter 22 paragraph 7:

“As it is of the Law of nature, that in general a proportion of time by Gods appointment, be set apart for the Worship of God; so by his Word, in a positive moral, and perpetual commandement, binding all men, in all Ages, he hath particularly appointed one day in seven for a Sabbath to be kept holy unto him, which from the beginning of the World to the Resurrection of Christ, was the last day of the week; and from the resurrection of Christ, was changed into the first day of the week which is called the Lords day; and is to be continued to the end of the World, as the Christian sabbath; the observation of the last day of the week being abolished.”[2]

From this, we can summarize that the Christian Sabbath in the SLC is: (1) a command established at creation for a weekly day of rest; (2) binding upon all men in all ages until the end of the world; and (3) was changed from the last to the first day of the week at the resurrection. The SLC explains the practical implications of this view for Christians today in Paragraph 8:

“The Sabbath is then kept holy unto the Lord, when men after a due preparing of their hearts, and ordering their common affairs aforehand, do not only observe an holy rest all the day, from their own works, words, and thoughts, about their worldly employment, and recreations, but also are taken up the whole time in the publick and private exercises of his worship, and in the duties of necessity and mercy.”[3]

This paper will briefly survey the background to this view, showing it to be something of an historical outlier, before going on to summarize the biblical arguments used to support it.

Historical Background

The SLC was drafted by Calvinist Baptists in London in 1677 to show their doctrinal agreement with the Presbyterians and Congregationalists.[4] To achieve this, they altered a version of the Westminster Confession published by the Presbyterians in 1648, just as Congregationalists had done to produce the Savoy Confession in 1658. The second edition of the SLC appeared in 1688 and was widely publicized in 1689. While there are differences with both the Westminster Confession and Savoy Confession on issues like baptism and church polity, it is almost identical on the Sabbath. As a result, the SLC contains the common Puritan position in the 17th century.

After surveying a range of Puritans, J. I. Packer concludes they held this view on the Sabbath “with virtual unanimity”.[5] This is rather surprising, for we shall see it was a significant development on the understanding of the Reformers. The scale of this development is clear when the view of John Calvin is considered.[6] Calvin taught the main way believers keep the Sabbath is to “lay aside their own works to allow God to work in them”.[7] He only secondarily speaks of a “stated day for them to assemble” for worship and rest.[8] However, crucially, he did not think this had to take place on a specific day in the week.[9] The Heidelberg Catechism took a similar view, stating Christians must worship on a day of rest, but not how often or which day this should be.[10]

The view of the SLC also differs with that held before the Reformation, particularly in the early centuries of the church.[11] Ignatius represents “the dominant trend” in the 2nd century by emphasizing that Christians should reject any tendency towards imitating the Jewish Sabbath.[12] However, as time went on, the Lord’s Day became more significant and was increasingly seen as holy.[13] For example, the Council of Laodicea in the 4th century held Christians should cease from normal work, if possible, in order to worship.[14] Yet, this still falls short of the SLC. Further, as Packer shows, Augustine and most medieval theologians also denied “that the Lord’s Day was in any sense a Sabbath.”[15] In this way, the Christian Sabbath of the SLC is an historical outlier.

Biblical Arguments

Despite its historical background, the Christian Sabbath has been held by many over the years due to the biblical evidence supporting it. Having identified the three core components of the view above, this paper now outlines the arguments that are used to support each of them.

(1) Creation Ordinance. Most agree the strongest argument for the Christian Sabbath is that it is a creation ordinance.[16] A creation ordinance is a command given before the Fall that shows “the constitution of things as they were intended to be from the Creator’s hand”.[17] They are “appropriate for every age” because they “express the basic relationship between Creator and creature”.[18] For example, marriage is a clear creation ordinance (Gen 2:24; Matt 19:5; Eph 5:31). As Schreiner puts it, “The argument is clear and cogent. Commands rooted in creation still apply today. The Sabbath command appeals to creation; and, therefore, it must be obeyed today.”[19]

It is argued the Sabbath is a creation ordinance because God rested on the seventh day and so “blessed” it “and made it holy” (Gen 2:2–3). There is no explicit command for Adam to also rest. However, this is to be implied from the image of God (1:26–27).[20] This image meant Adam was to imitate God’s work in creation by subduing and filling the earth (1:28). It is argued it also implicitly meant he was to follow God’s example by resting on the seventh day.[21]  As Guy Waters states, “As human beings imitate God at work, so also they are to imitate God at rest.”[22]

However, “the clinching argument” for a creation ordinance is the explicit connection made in the fourth commandment of the Decalogue (Exod 20:8–11).[23] As John Murray puts it, “the sabbath of God’s rest is the reason given for the sabbath of man’s rest”.[24] It is argued this command to remember the Sabbath day in Exodus 20:8 “assumes its previous existence”.[25] As a result, it simply codifies the original obligation that existed to keep the Sabbath from creation.[26]

(2) Perpetual Obligation. The next strongest reason for a Christian Sabbath is that the fourth commandment incorporates it into the Decalogue. This is based on the SLC’s view of the Law, with the Ten Commandments said to be the “same Law that was first written in the heart of man” and so “a perfect rule of Righteousness after the fall”.[27]Unlike the civil and ceremonial law given to Israel, which came to an end, the moral law “doth for ever bind all”.[28] The threefold division of the Law, with the continuation of the moral law, remains a common view today.[29]

The best argument for the continuation of the Decalogue is that at least part of it is explicitly applied to Christians (Rom 13:9; Jas 2:8–12). For example, James quotes the sixth and seventh commands in James 2:8–12. Therefore, B. B. Warfield reasons James “might have taken any others of the precepts of the Decalogue to illustrate his point – the Fourth as well as the Sixth or Seventh.”[30] As a result, the entire Decalogue is “the rule or standard of Christian obedience”.[31]

(3) Resurrection Transformation. While the Sabbath is a perpetual obligation from creation, it is “transformed” today.[32] First, this is because the ceremonial and civil laws about the Sabbath have come to an end through Christ’s fulfilment, such as the death penalty for breaches (Num 15:32–36) and festivals connected with it (Lev 23:1–44).[33] Secondly, the resurrection has transformed it so that it is now celebrated on the first day of the week rather than the seventh. As Waters explains, “As the seventh day of the week commemorated God’s work of creation, so the first day of the week commemorates God’s work of new creation, which dawned in human history at Christ’s resurrection.”[34] While a few Sabbaths are on the first day in the Old Testament (Lev 23:11; 23:35),[35] “an unmistakable pattern” of worship on the first day emerges in the New Testament (Matt 28:1–10; Luke 24:13–49; John 20:1; Acts 2:1; 20:7; 1 Cor 16:2).[36]

This change is confirmed by calling it “the Lord’s Day” in Revelation 1:10.[37] The weight of this phrase cannot be overstated, with the only one like it in the New Testament “the Lord’s Supper” (1 Cor 11:20). Just as that meal was set apart from others because of its special relationship to the Lord, this day has a similar relationship. This reflects how the Sabbath was also the Lord’s holy day in the Old Testament (Exod 20:10; Isa 58:13). Given this, it is hard to imagine early Christians would not see that the Lord’s day in the Old Testament, the Sabbath, had been transformed into the New Testament Lord’s Day.[38] While the actual day changed, the obligation to worship and rest is unchanged.[39]As a result, the SLC calls it the Christian Sabbath.

Interpreting the Sabbath

Having outlined the background and evidence for the Christian Sabbath, this paper will argue there is a better interpretation of the biblical position. It will now demonstrate that: (1) the Sabbath is only typologically connected to the rest at creation; (2) the Sabbath only obligates those under the Mosaic covenant; and (3) the entire Mosaic covenant, including the Sabbath, has been fulfilled through Christ, who consummates the antitype of eternal rest for his people.[40]

(1) The Sabbath and Creation

Genesis 2:2–3 is a hugely significant text, providing the first glimpse of eschatology in the Bible and functioning as “a fitting capstone in the magnificent structure of Genesis 1–2:3.”[41] However, the Sabbath is not explicitly mentioned and we must “be careful not to read back into this passage more than it actually says.”[42] While it describes how God rested after creation, it is less clear it prescribes how humanity should order their lives. Instead, what is clear from the rest of Scripture is that creation rest begins a typological pattern that is finally fulfilled in Christ.

Creation Ordinances. There are undoubtedly creation ordinances, such as marriage or gender, and the New Testament makes clear these still apply today (Matt 19:5; 1 Tim 2:13).[43] However, there is no explicit command to sanctify the seventh day at creation. This differs from the case of marriage, as Genesis 2:24 provides an explicit instruction for marriage going forward. It is possible that Genesis 2:2–3 includes an implicit instruction, as argued above. However, this must ultimately be proved from the text. Further, even if a creation ordinance exists, we should not conclude that it cannot be altered or changed. Afterall, Jesus explains the creation ordinance of marriage was altered with the addition of divorce at the time of Moses (Matt 19:8).

Image of God. While it is argued the image of God implicitly requires the imitation of God’s rest on the seventh day, this does not actually require weekly rest. Instead, Adam imitates God by completing his task (1:28) and then entering eternal eschatological rest.[44] Unlike the previous six days (1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31), the seventh is not said to have a morning or evening. Instead, it is presented as an unending day in Genesis 2:2, which God enters after he finishes his creation work. As shown below, Hebrews 4 clearly explains this is the eschatological rest we all should aim to enter after our work on earth is done. Adam would only need to imitate a kind of weekly rest if we understood God himself to observe weekly rest, which is clearly not the case.

Use in Exodus. While the word Sabbath does not actually appear in Genesis 2:2–3, a reference to rest establishes an implicit connection that is made explicit in Exodus 20:8–11. The key interpretive decision is whether to read this connection forward or backward. As above, if backward, then we will conclude the Sabbath was an obligation from creation. If forward, then Genesis 2:2–3 is the typological seed for what develops into the Sabbath in Exodus 20:8­–11. This is the better way to read it, allowing the type to escalate as we move through the canon, as required in typology.[45] While “the sabbath of God’s rest is the reason given for the sabbath of man’s rest”,[46] this need not mean that man was obligated to rest before Exodus. Instead, Exodus 20:11 may just be an analogy, with Moses highlighting this in advance to his readers (Gen 2:3).[47]

As seen below, this is supported by the typological reading in Hebrews 4. Further, it is also clear from the Old Testament.[48] After Genesis, there is an escalating link between rest and land: land rests at the jubilee (Lev 25:1–7), Israel rests by possessing land (Deut 3:20; Josh 1:15; 1 Kgs 5:4) and rest refers to land (Deut 12:9; Ps 95:11). This will culminate in Hebrews 4. In this way, we see Genesis 2:2 and the Sabbath can be linked without being equated. As is often the case, the New Testament clarifies how we can correctly read this Old Testament connection.

After Creation. If the Sabbath was a creation ordinance, it should have been observed before Moses. However, the seventh day is never mentioned again in Genesis. The best way to explain this is that Genesis 2:2–3 did not require weekly rest.[49] In contrast, as seen at the birth of Noah, mankind sought eternal rest to “give us rest from our work and from the toil of our hands arising from the ground which the LORD has cursed.” (Genesis 5:29 NASB) Murray tries to argue the Sabbath was kept by the patriarchs, and even if they failed to do so, this can be likened to their wrongful practice of polygamy despite Genesis 2:24.[50] While this is always possible, the comparison with marriage should not be made. Afterall, marriage continued and has a key role in Genesis, even if it is corrupted by polygamy. In contrast, the seventh day disappears entirely. As a result, it is unlikely that weekly rest or worship was given to man as a creation ordinance.

Exodus 16. There is a significant reference to the Sabbath before the Decalogue and Exodus 20. In Exodus 16:22–30, Moses gives instructions on keeping the Sabbath on the seventh day when collecting manna. Those who hold to a Christian Sabbath argue “there is no indication in the text that he was giving it to Israel for the very first time... it is a command with which Israel appears to have had prior familiarity.”[51] However, conversely, nothing in the passage indicates such familiarity. The instructions are detailed, and the fact Moses had to tell Israel to keep it suggests they did not know to do so otherwise. As a result, Schreiner concludes, “The newness of the Sabbath ordinance in Exodus 16 constitutes another piece of evidence supporting the notion that the Sabbath was not given at creation and that it is not intended to last forever.”[52]

(2) The Sabbath and Covenant

Having distinguished the Sabbath from a creation ordinance like marriage, this paper now shows that it functions more like a covenant sign such as circumcision. Just as circumcision was the sign of the Abrahamic covenant (Gen 17:11), the Sabbath was the sign of the Mosaic covenant (Exod 31:12, 16–17). As a result, it only endured for as long as the Mosaic covenant was in force.[53] When the substance of Christ came, such shadows passed away (Col 2:16–17).

Covenant Redemption. There are significantly two versions of the fourth command (Exod 20:8–11: Deut 5:12–15). It is often suggested the difference is that the motive for Exodus 20:8–11 is God’s rest at creation, while in Deuteronomy 5:12–15 it is redemption from Egypt.[54] As a result, those who hold the Christian Sabbath view suggest there is a “two-fold basis for the seventh-day Sabbath”,[55] with redemption as “a complementary but distinct ground for Sabbath observance” as an “additional meaning” to the creation ordinance.[56] However, as the motive for the whole Decalogue is redemption from Egypt (Exod 20:2), this is clearly the overall reason for the Sabbath in both passages. Further, once the idea of a creation ordinance is refuted, this is the sole reason, and the Sabbath is completely connected to the Mosaic covenant that it signifies.

Covenant Unity. As seen above, a threefold division of the Law into ceremonial, civil and moral is foundational for the Christian Sabbath. However, although this division is common, it has little biblical support. While Jesus distinguishes weightier matters of the Law (Matt 23:23), the New Testament consistently treats the Law as a unity (Gal 3:10–11; 5:3; Jas 2:8–13).[57] This means that while the Decalogue is central to the Mosaic covenant, it is still within that covenant and should be treated as part of the whole covenantal package. The Mosaic covenant was clearly temporary in God’s plan (Rom 10:4; Gal 3:15–4:7; Heb 7:11–12) and has now come to an end. As a result, it no longer binds Christians, who are not under the Law (Rom 6:14; 1 Cor 9:20–21; Gal 5:13–18). Therefore, the Law has no “direct authority” for them today.[58] This is the same status that the SLC gives ceremonial and civil laws today.[59] However, this paper argues it should also be extended to moral laws, including the Decalogue and Sabbath, as the Law must be treated as a unit rather than arbitrarily divided into three categories in a way Scripture never supports.[60]

This unity is illustrated by the interweaving of the Sabbath with both ceremonial and civil laws. To separate these is to break the unity of the Mosaic covenant. For example, Sabbath violations resulted in the civil penalty of death (Num 15:32–36), and the Sabbath underpinned various festivals (Lev 2) and bracketed instructions for the Tabernacle (Exod 24:16; 31:12–17). We will see below that Jesus fulfilled the entire Mosaic covenant, not merely certain strands.

Covenant Obligation. That the Sabbath was only an obligation for those under the Mosaic covenant is clear from the Prophets. Sabbath violations are regularly part of accusations against Israel (Jer 17:19–27; Ezek 20:5–31; 22:8; 23:38).[61] Yet, such charges are never brought against another nation. For example, while the Sabbath appears at both the start and end of Isaiah (1:13; 66:23), showing the renewal the Messiah brings, the Sabbath is never found in an oracle for another nation (Isa 13–27). Despite centuries of violations, no nation except Israel is ever said to have breached the Sabbath. This is best explained by the obligation only relating to Israel.

Covenant Expectation. The Old Testament also speaks of the Sabbath prophetically in the future (Isa 56:1–8, 58:13–14). In Isaiah 66:23 we read in “the new heavens and the new earth... all flesh shall come to worship” the Lord and do so from “new moon to new moon, and from Sabbath to Sabbath” (ESV). As is often the case, this speaks of unending worship by using the forms of the Mosaic covenant so familiar to Isaiah’s readers.[62] Similarly, the future worship of God’s people is described as a Temple (Ezek 40–48). In this, we read that “they shall keep my Sabbaths holy” (44:24), God’s prince will provide offerings “at the feasts, the new moons, and the Sabbaths...to make atonement on behalf of the house of Israel” (45:17), and that priests will offer these in the Temple on the Sabbath (46:1–5). These prophecies are fulfilled in “the person and work of Christ... He is the eschatological temple, the heavenly high priest, and the once-for-all sacrificial offering by which sinners are brought near to God.”[63] In the same way, we will see Christ is the eschatological Sabbath, for he fulfills the expectations of the Mosaic covenant as a package, not just the sacrifices and the Temple, but also the Sabbath and festivals (Col 2:16–17).

(3) The Sabbath and Consummation

This paper has proved the Sabbath is only an obligation for those under the Mosaic covenant, rather than a creation ordinance. It will now demonstrate that Christ has completely fulfilled the Mosaic covenant, including the Sabbath, and brought about the antitype of eternal rest for his people. In this way, we see that the typological acorn of creation rest, after growing into the sapling of the Sabbath, has now developed into the great oak of eternal rest in Christ.

Fulfilment in Jesus. The New Testament is clear that the person and work of Jesus is the fulfilment of the whole Old Testament (Matt 5:17; 10:13), including the Law (Rom 10:4). This fulfilment includes the Sabbath, with Jesus proclaiming that he gives rest (Matt 11:28–30) immediately before a debate over the Sabbath (Matt 12:1–14). Through his regular healings on the Sabbath, Jesus taught the purpose of the Sabbath was to save life (Mark 3:4), free those in bonds (Luke 13:12), and restore health (Luke 14:3).[64] Further, by quoting Isaiah 61:1–2 on the Sabbath in Luke 4:16–30, he declared he came to accomplish what the Sabbath had anticipated: proclaiming liberty to captives and the year of jubilee.[65] However, Jesus observed the Sabbath (Luke 4:16, 44; 13:1–10) and festivals (John 2, 5, 6, 7–8, 12) as “the public ministry as well as the death and burial of Jesus took place during and under the Mosaic covenant”.[66] Therefore, it is only after the Gospels that we clearly see the implications of Christ’s fulfilment of the Sabbath.[67]

Hebrews 4. As already seen, the most important text for understanding the Sabbath is Hebrews 4. It quotes Genesis 2 (4:4) and alludes to Exodus 20 (4:9). As a result, it shows how to correctly interpret these texts. Most now agree that the reference to rest for believers in Hebrews 4:1–10 is the eschatological rest of eternity (Rev 14:13). This contrasts with the rest of the land for Israel, or the rest from works righteousness in the Reformers’ interpretation.[68] As a result, we can conclude that while our rest has been inaugurated, it has not yet consummated. For despite being fulfilled by Christ, it still remains for the people of God to enter into it (Heb 4:3, 10).[69]

Many who hold to a Christian Sabbath view argue that until this rest is consummated, Christians should keep the Sabbath.[70] For example, Beale reasons, “If the eschatological reality of final Sabbath rest has not consummately come, then it is unlikely that the typological sign pointing to that ultimate rest has ceased.”[71] Indeed, he argues concluding otherwise is a sign of “overrealized eschatology.”[72] However, this is inconsistent with how other aspects of the biblical covenants apply to Christians today, such as with sacrifices or the Temple. As Schreiner argues, the important concept of already-not-yet means that even if the consummation of a type is in the future, we already come to the substance of it in the present in Christ (e.g. Heb 12:22; 13:14).[73] Therefore, if the Sabbath is fulfilled by Christ, there is no obligation to observe it today. If the new covenant has come, the Mosaic covenant is obsolete and ready to vanish away (Heb 8:13).

Paul on the Sabbath. This view of Hebrews 4 is confirmed by Paul, who gives no hint that the Sabbath continues. In three passages, Paul links it to food laws and circumcision, which were also fulfilled by Christ and no longer apply to Christians (Rom 14:5; Gal 4:9–10; Col 2:16–17).[74] The clearest of these is Colossians 2:16–17, which picks up the expectation of the Prophets and declares that festivals, new moons and Sabbaths are all “a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.” This mirrors the language of Hebrews about the Law (10:1).[75] Some try to exclude a weekly Sabbath day from references to “days” and “Sabbath” in these texts.[76] Yet, Calvin rightly asks, “Who but madmen cannot see what observance the apostle means?”[77] Even many who hold to a Christian Sabbath view accept that Paul references a weekly Sabbath and that such texts are “the most persuasive rebuttal to the Sabbatarian position.”[78]

Lord’s Day. As above, there is clearly a pattern in the New Testament of worshiping on the first day of the week, known as the Lord’s Day. However, the fact early Christians did not appear to recognize it as a day of rest is a “formidable problem” for “the claim that the Lord’s Day is a Sabbath”.[79] As shown by A. T. Lincoln, most Jewish Christians rested on the Sabbath and worshipped with Christians on the Lord’s Day.[80] Indeed, this is probably the tension behind Romans 14:5. For the first few centuries of church history, Christians did not cease from work on the Lord’s Day, but rather met for worship early in the morning and late at night (Acts 20:7).[81] Frame defends such violations of the Christian Sabbath in these centuries by arguing they were not able to legally or practically rest.[82]However, if it is a Sabbath, then even compulsion cannot justify breaching this obligation. From all this, it is clear the Sabbath did not change to the first day of the week. While the Lord’s Day sets a pattern for worship, it is not a Sabbath day of rest.

Conclusion

After considering all the above, this paper can gladly conclude with Paul, “Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.” (Rom 14:5) Afterall, there are good arguments for the Christian Sabbath, and many godly Christians and gifted theologians have historically held it. Nevertheless, this paper has demonstrated that the Christian Sabbath in the SLC lacks sufficient biblical support. It has shown the Sabbath is not a creation ordinance, but instead typologically connected to rest at creation. Further, it is not an obligation for all, but only for those under the Mosaic covenant. Finally, the Sabbath did not change day at the resurrection, but was fulfilled in Christ along with the rest of the Mosaic covenant. He has inaugurated the antitype for his people in the present, and we will enter the consummated reality of eternal rest in the future. As a result, there is no obligation for Christians to observe the Sabbath today.

Nevertheless, regularly gathering for worship is an obligation (Heb 10:25). Further, as we have seen, there is a clear pattern of doing so on the Lord’s Day in the New Testament and in history. As a result, while Christians are not required to rest on the first day of the week, there appears to be an obligation for them to worship together on it.[83] As we do so, we remember the person and work of Jesus Christ, through whom we can enter the eternal rest that remains, of which even the most blessed Sabbaths were only ever a dim shadow.

[1] W. J. McGlothlin, Baptist Confessions of Faith (Philadelphia, PN: ABPS, 1911), 261.

[2] McGlothlin, Baptist Confessions of Faith, 261.

[3] McGlothlin, Baptist Confessions of Faith, 261.

[4] McGlothlin, Baptist Confessions of Faith, 215.

[5] J. I. Packer, A Quest for Godliness (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010), 237.

[6] See Richard B. Gaffin, Calvin and the Sabbath (Fearn, Scotland: Mentor, 1998), 141–43.

[7] John Calvin and Ford Lewis Battles, Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion, The Library of Christian Classics 20–21 (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001), 394.

[8] Calvin and Battles, Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion, 394. This was largely Luther’s position as well, see Joseph A. Pipa, The Lord’s Day (Fearn, Scotland: Mentor, 1997), 109.

[9] John M. Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R, 2008), 517.

[10] Herman Hoeksema, The Triple Knowledge: An Exposition of the Heidelberg Catechism (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformed Free Pub. Association, 1900), 3:250. Also Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life, 519. 

[11] For a brief summary of the views in early church, see Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life, 564. For more see R. J. Bauckham, “Sabbath and Sunday in the Post-Apostolic Church,” in From Sabbath to Lord’s Day: A Biblical, Historical, and Theological Investigation, ed. D. A. Carson (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 1999), 251–87.

[12] Bauckham, “Sabbath and Sunday in the Post-Apostolic Church,” 259.

[13] For example, see Tertullian and Dionysius of Corinth. Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life, 564.

[14] Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life, 564.

[15] Packer, A Quest for Godliness, 236. Augustine continued to interpret the Sabbath eschatologically, but in the Medieval Church the idea of Sabbath transfering to the Lord’s Day slowly began to gain prominence. See R. J. Bauckham, “Sabbath and Sunday in the Medieval Church in the West,” in From Sabbath to Lord’s Day: A Biblical, Historical, and Theological Investigation, ed. D. A. Carson (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 1999), 299–307.

[16] Thomas R. Schreiner, “Good-bye and Hello: The Sabbath Command for New Covenant Believers,” in Progressive Covenantalism: Charting a Course between Dispensational and Covenant Theologies, ed. Stephen J. Wellum, and Brent Parker (Nashville: B&H Academic, 2016), 168. Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life, 534.

[17] Walter C. Kaiser, Toward Old Testament Ethics (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1983), 31.

[18] Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life, 533.

[19] Schreiner, “Good-bye and Hello,” 168. See the argument in much more detail in Jon English Lee, “‘There Remains a Sabbath Rest for the People of God’: A Biblical, Theological, and Historical Defense of Sabbath Rest As a Creation Ordinance” (PhD diss., The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2018), 211.

[20] G. K. Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology: The Unfolding of the Old Testament in the New (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2011), 776. Richard C. Barcellos, Getting the Garden Right: Adam’s Work and God’s Rest in Light of Christ (Cape Coral, FL: Founders Press, 2017), 172, 177.

[21] Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology, 776.

[22] Guy P. Waters, The Sabbath as Rest: Hope for the People of God (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2022), 18. Another reason for holding the Sabbath to be a creation ordinance is when the term “holy” (2:3) is used it normally means setting apart for cultic use in worship (Deut 5:12; Jer 17:22; Ezek 20:20; Neh 13:22). For this argument see Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology, 778. See also Waters, The Sabbath as Rest, 17.

[23] Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life, 531.

[24] John Murray, Principles of Conduct: Aspects of Biblical Ethics (London: Tyndale Press, 1957), 31.

[25] Barcellos, Getting the Garden Right, 188. Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology, 781.

[26] Waters, The Sabbath as Rest, 21.

[27] Chapter 19 Paragraph 2 of the SLC in McGlothlin, Baptist Confessions of Faith, 255.

[28] Chapter 19 Paragraphs 3 and 5 of the SLC in McGlothlin, Baptist Confessions of Faith, 255.

[29] Again, the SLC reflects the same position as the Westminster Confession of Faith. The Decalogue are said to be “universal human duties, the common morality of mankind” that reveal “the holy will” of God and so are perpetual and unchanging. B. Warfield, Selected Shorter Writings of Benjamin B. Warfield (Nutley, NJ: P&R, 1970), 2:312. For an overview and background of this view, see Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life, 203–36.

[30] Warfield, Selected Shorter Writings of Benjamin B. Warfield, 2:315.

[31] Waters, The Sabbath as Rest, 122.

[32] Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology, 776.

[33] Waters, The Sabbath as Rest, 42.

[34] Waters, The Sabbath as Rest, 13.

[35] Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life, 567.

[36] Waters, The Sabbath as Rest, 105. Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life, 560.

[37] From church history it is clear that this is the first day of the week. For example, the term Lord’s Day continues to be used for the first day of the week in the earliest Christian documents, such as the Didache and the Gospel of Peter. For more details see R. J. Bauckham, “The Lord’s Day,” in From Sabbath to Lord’s Day: A Biblical, Historical, and Theological Investigation, ed. D. A. Carson (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 1999), 232.

[38] Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life, 562.

[39] Pipa, The Lord’s Day, 95–110.

[40] Unsurprisingly, Beale notes that these are the three issues over which there is the most disagreement. Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology, 776.

[41] Harold H. P. Dressler, “The Sabbath in the Old Testament,” in From Sabbath to Lord’s Day: A Biblical, Historical, and Theological Investigation, ed. D. A. Carson (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 1999), 29. Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life, 529.

[42] A. G. Shead, “Sabbath” in New Dictionary of Biblical Theology, ed. T. Desmond Alexander and Brian S. Rosner, (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 745.

[43] Schreiner, “Good-bye and Hello,” 168.

[44] Even those hold a Christian Sabbath view acknowledge that this was the goal given to Adam to achieve by obediently completed his commission. Waters, The Sabbath as Rest, 12.

[45]Peter J. Gentry and Stephen J. Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant: A Biblical-Theological Understanding of the Covenants, 2nd ed. (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2018), 134. James M. Hamilton Jr., Typology: Understanding the Bible's Promise-Shaped Patterns: How Old Testament Expectations Are Fulfilled in Christ (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Academic, 2022), 23–27.

[46] Murray, Principles of Conduct, 31.

[47] Schreiner, “Good-bye and Hello,” 170. Dressler, “The Sabbath in the Old Testament,” 25.

[48] Dressler, “The Sabbath in the Old Testament,” 31.

[49] Schreiner, “Good-bye and Hello,” 160.

[50] Murray, Principles of Conduct, 35.

[51] No textual evidence is given for concluding Israel is familiar with it. Waters, The Sabbath as Rest, 35.

[52] Schreiner, “Good-bye and Hello,” 166.

[53] Schreiner, “Good-bye and Hello,” 164.

[54] Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life, 514.

[55] Barcellos, Getting the Garden Right, 190.

[56] Waters, The Sabbath as Rest, 13, 40.

[57] Jason C. Meyer, “The Mosaic Law, Theological Systems, and the Glory of Christ,” in Progressive Covenantalism: Charting a Course between Dispensational and Covenant Theologies, ed. Stephen J. Wellum, and Brent E. Parker (Nashville: B&H Academic, 2016), 88. Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 785.

[58] Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 785–86. For a detailed treatment see Douglas J. Moo, “The Law of Moses or The Law of Christ,” in Continuity and Discontinuity: Perspectives on the Relationship between the Old and New Testaments, ed. S John S Feinberg, (Westchester, IL: Crossway, 1988), 203–220.

[59] Chapter 19 Paragraphs 3–4 of the SLC in McGlothlin, Baptist Confessions of Faith, 255.

[60] Even Frame admits that “when we get into details, these designations are not as sharp or as helpful as we might like.” Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life, 214.

[61] Waters, The Sabbath as Rest, 53.

[62] Waters, The Sabbath as Rest, 60.

[63] Waters, The Sabbath as Rest, 67.

[64] Waters, The Sabbath as Rest, 86.

[65] Waters, The Sabbath as Rest, 80–82.

[66] Waters, The Sabbath as Rest, 75.

[67] Schreiner, “Good-bye and Hello,” 171.

[68] Richard B. Gaffin, “A Sabbath Rest Still Awaits the People of God,” in Pressing toward the Mark, ed. Charles G. Dennison and Richard C. Gamble (Philadelphia: Orthodox Presbyterian Church, 1986), 33–34. Schreiner, “Good-bye and Hello,” 182. Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 797.

[69] Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology, 785. Schreiner, “Good-bye and Hello,” 183–85.

[70] Waters, The Sabbath as Rest, 31. Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life, 559.

[71] Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology, 789. Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life, 560.

[72] Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology, 791.

[73] Schreiner, “Good-bye and Hello,” 184–86.

[74] Schreiner, “Good-bye and Hello,” 175–77, 179­–180.

[75] Schreiner, “Good-bye and Hello,” 179–180.

[76] Waters, The Sabbath as Rest, 126.

[77] Calvin and Battles, Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion, 398.

[78] Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life, 568. See Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology, 792.

[79] Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life, 562.

[80] A. T. Lincoln, “From Sabbath to Lord’s Day: A Biblical and Theological Perspective,” in From Sabbath to Lord’s Day, ed. D. A. Carson (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 1999), 384.

[81] Shead, “Sabbath,” 750.

[82] Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life, 564.

[83] Schreiner, “Good-bye and Hello,” 186–88.