Restoration Ministries | home
Romans 14
by Jon Zens
_________________________________________________________________________________
The issues Paul deals with in Romans 14 are still with us. We still judge one another improperly, and by inapplicable norms. If we learned what is important in the kingdom (Romans 14:17 b), we would not judge one another by things that are not norms in the kingdom (Romans 14:17 a).
Christians have differences about days. Paul says that some Christians regard every day the same, while others esteem one day above another. Adventists and other groups esteem Saturday as the “Sabbath.” Protestants generally esteem Sunday as the “Christian Sabbath,” or as “the Lord*s Day.” Some Christians have no “holy days.”
Instead of allowing each Christian to be persuaded in his own mind (14:5), we judge others by our calendar. This would stop if we were content to let Christians esteem all days alike, or esteem certain ones according to their convictions. The kingdom of Christ simply does not consist of day-keeping. The following statements might help put this matter into perspective.
1. While God was very specific about “days” in the old covenant, He is silent about them in the new covenant. There is no solid evidence in the New Testament that God attaches theological/ethical significance to any particular day. There were clear imperatives to observe “days” in the old covenant; they are lacking in the new covenant.
2. The Sabbath of the Decalogue was a “shadow,” the “substance” of which is Christ (Colossians 2:17) Thus, the Sabbath is no longer a norm by which to judge in the new covenant (Colossians 2:17). There is no evidence that God has declared any 24-hour period as “holy” in the gospel age.
3. Technically, the “Sabbath” is Saturday. There is no New Testament evidence that the “Sabbath” was transferred to Sunday. Attaching “Sabbath” and “Sunday” was a post-apostolic development.
4. It is not sound exegesis to build a theology of the “Lord*s Day” on Rev 1:10. To elevate Sunday as a day with an imperative attached to it cannot be substantiated in the New Testament. Connecting “Sunday” and “Lord*s Day” is a post-apostolic development. The case built on several texts to support a “Lord*s Day” theology is not compelling. [1] To teach young people that they need to “realize how important Sunday is to God” cannot be supported by Scriptural data. [2]
5. The imperative in the New Testament is attached to the necessity of assembling with the brethren, not to a particular 24-hour period (Hebrews 10:25). The emphasis is not on keeping a day, but on building up one another (Hebrews 10:24). There is no evidence that a church can incur sin by meeting on the “wrong” day. We sin by not exhorting one another as we should (Hebrews 3:12-13).
When the emphasis has fallen on keeping a day, it can be shown from history that there is a corresponding lack of concern for the needs of people. Like the poor man in Puritan New England who fell into a well on Sunday. The church had to have a special meeting to decide whether to get him out on the “Sabbath,” or wait until Monday.
6. Christians must be allowed to esteem days if they wish, but they must not impose their convictions on everyone else. Christian unity and harmony will always by violated when brethren bind others in areas where there is vast liberty.
______________________________________________________________________________________
Notes for “Differences About Days”
[1] Cf. Samluele Bacchiocchi, From Sabbath to Sunday, pp. 90-131.
[2] “Why Sunday?,” Freeway, SP Publications, 9/16/84.
________________________________________________________