What Day is the Sabbath? Do we still need to keep it?

Theology
142

Brother, your observations on first-day gatherings and apostolic practice are precise; the Resurrection inaugurates a new covenantal rhythm (Mark 16:2; John 20:19,26; Acts 20:7). These gatherings are not cultural accommodations but Spirit-empowered participation in the risen Christ, demonstrating that the Sabbath’s shadow finds its fulfillment in Him (Colossians 2:16–17; Hebrews 4:9–10).

Scripture consistently presents this transition as divinely authoritative rather than discretionary. The first day, in which Jesus rose and appeared to His disciples, became the locus for teaching, fellowship, and covenantal worship, reflecting the inauguration of the new creation and the eschatological rest promised in the Sabbath (Hebrews 4:1–10).

The apostles’ observance of the first day is not liturgical flexibility or casual novelty; it manifests the authority of the Resurrection and the new covenant. The Sabbath commandment is thus fulfilled in Christ, its typological shadow brought to substance. Believers enter true rest, not through a day marked on the calendar, but in union with the risen Lord, whose life inaugurates the eternal sabbatical reality intended by God.

143

Friends:

Reading through these comments, and erudite points of view, I think the darts are getting closer to the bullseye, the bullseye being the whole law fulfilled in Jesus, the Messiah. As we know, Jesus fulfilled the entire law, not just the law concerning the Sabbath. We could similarly discuss His fulfillment of each of the laws of the decalogue. But this one, sabbath keeping, one of only two active commands (i.e. something to do, instead of something to NOT do) was fulfilled in Christ in that having completed the cosmological sabbath, He actively rose on the first day of the cosmological week, early in the morning; the physical Jesus literally rested (in death) on the sabbath, and rose (in life) once it was fulfilled. We therefore died with Him, rest in Him, and are risen in Him. This we celebrate!

With respect to the balance of the decalogue, Jesus can accurately say:

I am the LORD thy God. There are other gods before me,
I am No graven image, likenesses, or idol, but a physical sacrifice,
I have taken the LORD’s name, not in vain, but in full accomplishment,
I am the eternal sabbath rest for humanity; all who rest will rest in me,
I completely Honored my father,
I brought LIFE to distribute to all who believe,
I secured my one bride for eternity,
I took back what was always mine,
I am The Truth,
I am complete, it is finished, I am in need of nothing more.

This law was given through Moses, not to encumber man, but to forensically demonstrate the eternal messiah through His fulfillment of it. The law pointed precisely at what The Christ would do. Our messiah fulfiled it, completely, and that fulfillment was manifest on the first day of the week. The law said “One day in seven remember the rest that will be provided in the Messiah”. Grace says “enter into my rest, eternally, and every minute of every day remember the rest you have in me”. “So now we have been delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter.” (Rom 7:6)

KP

144

KPuff,
re: "He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised, every male child in your generations, he who is born in your house or bought with money from any foreigner who is not your descendant. “…can also be accurately rendered “He who is a week old among you shall be circumcised.”

But the verse says that the baby has to be 8 days old. Which would mean that the circumcision wasn’t performed until after the 9th day began.
If verse 26 had said “And after one day His disciples were again inside…”, on what day of the week would it have been?

re: “…is hypothetical. If you have an actual example of this, I’d be happy to share my opinion.”

I don’t see what being hypothetical has to do with it. But since you ask, the verse itself is an example. It says, “…after eight days…” You’re saying that means on the first day of the week.

So, let’s see: if after eight days would be the first day of the week, then after seven days would be the seventh day of the week, and after six days would be the sixth day of the week, and after five days would be the fifth day of the week, and after four days would be the fourth day of the week, and after three days would be the third day of the week, and after two days would be the second day of the week, and after one day would be the first day of the week, which makes it the first day after the seventh day of the week and not the first day.

145

@rstrats
I see your logic, but unfortunately, I don’t think it really applies to the first century idiom “after eight days”. I see your point, and of course you are technically correct. I’m no ancient language scholar, but I don’t think anyone of that place and period would ever say “after two days” to mean tomorrow. It’s just a language anomaly, I guess. I think of it sort of like the modern idiom, “I’m going to call it a day”, meaning, I’m going to stop working for today", when it is not a literal 24-hour period I’m talking about.

Personally, I agree with almost all Christian disciples, who are not trying to force the point of “seventh day” observance, that the phrase “after eight days” in the Bible means the same thing as “a week later”. I get that you don’t see it that way. I understand.

Peace
KP

146

SincereSeeker,
re: "1 Corinthians 16:2 – You say it says nothing about gathering?

To answer your question, yes, I did write that.

It says, “On the first day of the week let each of you lay something aside, storing up as he may prosper.”

1 Corinthians 16 does not say that the Corinthians met together on the first day of the week. The text merely says that everyone should “lay by him in store” on the first day of the week. The Wemouth reads: “Let each of you put on one side and store up at his home”. Ballantine’s Translation reads: “Let each of you lay up at home”. The Syriac on this passage reads: “Let every one of you lay aside and preserve at home”. And the New Catholic Edition of the Bible reads: “…let each one of you put aside at home and lay up whatever he has a mind to”. The Aramaic Bible in Plain English reads: “On every Sunday, let each person of you lay aside in his house and keep that which he can, so that when I come there will be no collections”. The Lamsa Bible reads: “Upon the first day of every week, let each of you put aside and keep in his house whatever he can afford,so that there may be no collections when I come.” The Darby Bible reads: “On [the] first of [the] week let each of you put by at home, laying up [in] whatever [degree] he may have prospered, that there may be no collections when I come.” The Tyndale Bible of 1526 reads: “Vpon some sondaye let every one of you put a syde at home and laye vp what soever he thinketh mete that ther be no gaderinges when I come.”

re: “Now, why designate the first day for a collective act if they weren’t already gathering?”

Where does it say they were already collectively doing that?

re: "Paul didn’t say, 'Do it on the Sabbath,
or ‘whenever you feel like it.’”

I didn’t say he did.

re: “He anchored it to the first day, because by then, the Church was already recognizing it as the rhythm of new covenant life.”

Again, there are only two times mentioned where folks got together on the first day of the week, and nothing was said about for rest or in honor of the resurrection. The context of them could hardly be used to say that they established a “rhythm of new covenant life”.

re: “John 20:19 – You claim they were hiding, not worshiping. Fair. But Jesus chose to appear to them on the first day anyway.”

Probably because that was most likely the first time they had been together after the Sabbath.

re: “And then again, ‘after eight days’ (John 20:26). You insist that can’t be a Sunday, but you’re importing a modern counting system into a Jewish context. Inclusive reckoning was the norm—day one counts as the first day. “After eight days” from Sunday? That’s Sunday again.”

See my comment to KPuff.

re: “Acts 20:7 – Yes, they broke bread daily in Acts 2, but Luke goes out of his way to mention this meeting happened ‘on the first day of the week.’ Why highlight that if it was just one of many ordinary meals?”

We don’t know. Perhaps the author of Acts simply wanted to detail Paul’s itinerary for that day as he did for a number of Paul’s trips.

re: “And Paul preached until midnight. That’s not lunchtime fellowship… that’s church.”

Where is anything said about lunchtime fellowship? They could have met sometime after 6pm and we don’t know when Paul started to talk to them.

re: “So you say, “That’s not a pattern.” But let me ask you this:
Jesus rose on the first day.”

Maybe - only one verse, Mark 16:9, says that as it is translated in the KJV and similar versions, and even that verse is footnoted in many Bibles as questionable with regard to its authenticity.

re: “Jesus appeared to His disciples on the first day.”
This was the first day after the Sabbath that He had the opportunity.

re: “The Church gathered to break bread and receive teaching on the first day.”

Again, they did this daily. And the verse doesn’t say that that it was for the purpose of receiving teaching.

re: "Paul instructed giving on the first day.

See my comment to KPuff.

re: “The book of Revelation calls it [the first day of the week] the Lord’s Day…”

No it doesn’t, as you note at the end of your sentence.

147

KPuff,
re: “…but I don’t think anyone of that place and period would ever say ‘after two days’ to mean tomorrow.”

So, if someone back then on Wednesday said “after two days I’m going to a party”, to what day would they be referring?

148

@rstrats

You make a good point, and one I am not knowledgeable enough to answer positively. Hosea (6:2) uses the phrase you asked about, “after two days”, and that passage seems to equate it with “on the third day” in an example of poetic parallelism. The obvious inference of Hosea’s prophecy, however, is not to mark out any certain number of hours that it takes God to respond, but that upon repentance, The Lord is ready to “bind-up”, “revive”, & “raise us up”, in short order. Many believe this Hosea passage previews the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus, which those three parts of His passion are historically accepted to have a duration of less than 48 hours. (see 1 Corinthians 15:4)

Hosea 6:1-2

Come, and let us return to the LORD;
For He has torn, but He will heal us; He has stricken, but He will bind us up.
After two days He will revive us; On the third day He will raise us up,
That we may live in His sight.

1 Corinthians 15:3-8

For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles. Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time.

I know of two other occurrences of the phrase “after two days”, (Matt 26:2, & Mk 14:1), which are actually parallel accounts of the same teaching, but the actual duration in hours is difficult (for me) to be dogmatic about. The difficulty lies in the way our two cultures reckon time. You and I live with a subconscious understanding of a midnight to midnight “day”. That first-century mideastern culture lived in the understanding of a sunrise to sunset “day” and a sunset to sunrise “night” (see: John 9:4, & 11:9).

John 9:3-5

Jesus answered, “Neither this man nor his parents sinned, but that the works of God should be revealed in him. I must work the works of Him who sent Me while it is day; the night is coming when no one can work. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”

John 11:9-10

Jesus answered, “Are there not twelve hours in the day? If anyone walks in the day, he does not stumble, because he sees the light of this world. But if one walks in the night, he stumbles, because the light is not in him.”

The way a culture reckons “a day” affects the way their language communicates that understanding. It is the work of the diligent scholar to receive God’s word, in his own language, as originally intended. As I have been taught about this ancient culture, they reckoned the day in which they were at the time as day one, then there would be a period of “night”, then the second day would begin at sunrise. When translating a text, it is not only a language translation that is attempted, but a cultural translation as well.

I understand the point you are making. I personally see this nonessential tenet slightly differently than you do. Thanks for sharing your ideas.

KP

149

KPuff

re: "Hosea (6:2) uses the phrase you asked about, ‘after two days’, and that passage seems to equate it with ‘on the third day’…”

If we were stricken on Monday, after one day (with that day being Monday) would be Tuesday, revived after two days would be on Wednesday, and raised after three days would be on Thursday. So, when verse 2 says raised on the third day, it has to be referring to the third day after Monday. I don’t understand how it could be otherwise. But, hey, I just realized I’ve kinda lost track of what the issue is here.:thinking:

150

Buckle up, @rstrats and @ILOVECHRIST, because it’s time to clean house with chapter, verse, and some good old-fashioned spiritual common sense.

First, to ILOVECHRIST:
Your theological flow is tight. We agree on the big-picture truth… Christ is the fulfillment of the Sabbath, and His resurrection launched a new rhythm for the people of God. You rightly point out that the first day is not liturgical freelancing, but covenantal obedience in resurrection light. Well said.

Now, let’s mop up rstrats’ spilled ink.

Now, rstrats:

You’re out here quoting every translation known to man like the Greek text didn’t exist. But even your parade of versions doesn’t prove what you think it does.

1 Corinthians 16:2
Yes, some translations say “at home.” Great. But the key issue isn’t whether they stored it at home or brought it to the building. The issue is why Paul designated the first day for this act at all. He wasn’t randomly assigning donation day. Paul tied giving to the first day of the week… not the Sabbath, not payday, not “whenever you think of it.” That’s a Spirit-led pattern, not a travel detail.

You say, “Where does it say they were already collectively doing that?”
That’s the point… it doesn’t say they weren’t. But Paul’s command assumes a rhythm the Church was already walking in. He’s aligning spiritual practice with the resurrection framework of the new covenant, just like the gatherings in Acts 20:7.

John 20:19 and 20:26
You’re still dodging the obvious. Jesus didn’t appear to them randomly… He appeared on the first day, then again after eight days, which, using inclusive Jewish reckoning, lands you back on Sunday. That wasn’t fear-based coincidence. That was divine intentionality.

And no, it wasn’t just the “first opportunity.” Mary saw Him that morning (John 20:1, 17). He could have appeared to them then. He waited until evening… when they were gathered. Coincidence? No. Pattern.

Acts 20:7
Luke “just wanted to record Paul’s itinerary”? Really? Luke doesn’t mention random meal breaks in Philippi or Paul’s laundry schedule in Corinth. Yet here, he specifies the first day of the week, says they came together to break bread, and Paul preached until midnight. You don’t preach until midnight over appetizers. This was worship, Word, and communion… exactly what the early church was built on (Acts 2:42).

Also, don’t play coy with “lunchtime fellowship” jabs. You said daily bread-breaking made Acts 20:7 insignificant. I said midnight preaching makes that day stand out. It wasn’t a casual snack… it was intentional assembly.

Mark 16:9
You’re hanging your doubts on a footnote. Cute. But even if you strike that one verse, you still have all four Gospels affirming Jesus rose on the first day of the week (Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:2, Luke 24:1, John 20:1). That’s not one questionable verse. That’s a fourfold witness.

“The Lord’s Day” (Revelation 1:10)
No, it doesn’t say “Sunday.” And yet by the time John wrote it, the Church already knew what that phrase meant. If “the Lord’s Day” wasn’t Sunday, you’d have to believe John meant… what? The Sabbath? Then why not just say “Sabbath” like Scripture always does? Because by then, the Church wasn’t clinging to the shadows of Sinai. They were living in the light of the Resurrection.

Here’s the bottom line, rstrats:

You keep demanding a verse that reads like a legal code: “Thou shalt meet on Sunday at 10 AM sharp.” But you’re missing the living rhythm of a resurrected faith. The Church didn’t shift to Sunday because of Rome, Constantine, or convenience. It shifted because Christ rose, appeared, and the Spirit led His people into a new day of worship that reflected a new covenant reality.

You can call it weak evidence. But Scripture doesn’t cater to cynics. It lays out patterns for disciples, not permission slips for the skeptical.

So if you want a signposted ritual, go back to the Law.
If you want resurrection life, step into the Lord’s Day.

—Sincere Seeker. Scripturally savage. Here for the Truth.

151

amen
amen300×300 3.11 KB

This is gold!

Jesus “rested” on the Sabbath, in death, in fulfillment of the law.
Jesus “rose” on the first day of the week, inaugurating Eternal Life!

“So now we have been delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter.” (Rom 7:6)

Proclaim the Good News – New Life is available – life from the dead!
For as often as you eat this bread (broken body) and drink this cup (blood of death), you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes. 1 Corinthians 11:26

KP

152

@rstrats, the ESV of 1 Corinthians 16:2 says, “On the first day of every week, each of you is to put something aside and store it up, as he may prosper, so that there will be no collecting when I come.”

We need to distinguish between paraphrases and translations. Those that you quote seem to be paraphrases that add the paraphrasers’ interpretation of the text instead of translating the Greek word for word, the way the English Standard Version does.

153

To get 20 characters - post deleted.

154

SincereSeeker,
re: “You’re out here quoting every translation known to man like the Greek text didn’t exist.”

That seems to be a bit of excessive hyperbole, don’t you think?

re: “But even your parade of versions doesn’t prove what you think it does.”

I didn’t say that it does. I was just showing that there are a number of translations which say that the “storing up” was to be done at home, whereas there are no translations that I know of which say that the storing up was to done at a common meeting place. Therefore, 1Corinthians 16:2 is not an appropriate scripture for supporting the idea that the first day of the week was now a scripturally approved on going day for community rest and worship.

re: “Yes, some translations say ‘at home.’ Great. But the key issue isn’t whether they stored it at home or brought it to the building.”

Of course it is. The verse is trying to be used to validate a regular first day of the week religious meeting based on the idea that Paul was saying to bring the contribution to a central location.

re: “Paul tied giving to the first day of the week… not the Sabbath…”

What has the Sabbath got to do with it?

re: “You say, ‘Where does it say they were already collectively doing that?’ That’s the point…”

I know - because It doesn’t.

re: “But Paul’s command assumes a rhythm the Church was already walking in.”

That’s just speculation on your part. You’re simply assuming that to support your non-scriptural agenda.

re: “He’s aligning spiritual practice with the resurrection framework of the new covenant, just like the gatherings in Acts 20:7.”

Again, pure speculation.

155

Sincere Seeker,
re: “John 20:19 and 20:26 You’re still dodging the obvious. Jesus didn’t appear to them randomly…”

Still just your opinion.

re: “He appeared on the first day, then again after eight days, which, using inclusive Jewish reckoning, lands you back on Sunday.”

So, you’re saying that ‘after one day’ would be referring to Sunday? - That if something happened one day after Sunday that it would have happened on Sunday?

re: “And no, it wasn’t just the ‘first opportunity.’ Mary saw Him that morning (John 20:1, 17). He could have appeared to them then. He waited until evening… when they were gathered.”

But, Mark 16:11 says that when Mary M. had told those who had been with the Messiah that He was alive, they didn’t believe her. And verses 12-14 echo the same thing.

Also, I assume you’re saying that He could have seen them before the meeting, but then you say He waited until they were gathered. I don’t understand your point.

156

I’ll be honest @Officialcbcm I got as far as your claim that Constantine changed the day Christians met from Saturday to Sunday and I stopped reading.

This isn’t history, this is propaganda, and is objectively false information.

The historic evidence is overwhelming: Christians regularly gathered on the first day of the week, “Sunday”, and called it τῇ κυριακῇ [ἡμέρᾳ], “the Lord’s Day”.

“If, therefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord’s Day,“ - St. Ignatius of Antioch to the Magnesians

“And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons.“ - St. Justin Martyr, First Apology

This claim that Constantine did anything involves a law in which Constantine ruled that the first day of the week ought to be a day off from work for those living in the cities. Constantine made Sunday a national holiday. He did not, nor did he have any authority to, change Christian observances.

There is this strange fiction people have imagined that thinks Constantine was somehow all powerful, but he was just a dude. Constantine lacked any authority or power in or over the Church. Constantine was powerful enough to summon a lot of bishops to meet at Nicea to hash out the Christological controversy raging in the East, but he had no authority to determine the outcome. Constantine wasn’t a theologian, he didn’t have any skin in the game–he just wanted the bishops to reach a conclusion so they’d stop fighting because his interests were political: to unite the Roman Empire under himself.

Tangent: Let’s have an aside about Nicea for a moment. Nicea wasn’t the first or last council to deal with this controversy, but it was the largest and it is the one that has the most significance for Christians today because of the Nicene Creed, though the form we use today was finalized at the Council of Constantinople decades after Nicea. But there were a lot of councils, and some councils favored Arianism. Nicea didn’t end the Arian Controversy, it continued throughout the rest of the 4th century, often with imperial support: Constantine himself came under the influence of the Arian party, his closest spiritual advisors included Eusebius of Nicomedia, a devout Arian, this is the man who baptized Constantine when Constantine finally submitted to being baptized. Constantine’s heirs were instructed by Arians, and many in the Constantinian dynasty were devout and fiercely Arian–to the point of persecuting and oppressing those who confessed the Nicene formula. This was most evident in the treatment of St. Athanasius. Athanasius was, like Arius, a presbyter in Alexandria, it was Athanasius who was chosen to succeed as bishop, however over his life Athanasius would be forced out of the bishop’s chair and exiled numerous times. Leading to the famous expression Athanasius Contra Mundum, “Athanasius against the world”. Constantine himself had Athanasius forced out and forcefully had an Arian installed as bishop–and yet what is the legacy for the Church? We have St. Athanasius Defender of the Faith, and we confess one Lord Jesus Christ, homoousios with the Father. Even when imperial power tried to oppress the truth, it failed.

Let’s stop with the pseudo-history, shall we?

1 Like
157

Oh, @rstrats… You’re still swatting at verses like they’re flies in your theological kitchen, but the swarm of scriptural evidence isn’t going away just because you keep waving your “It’s not explicit enough!” flyswatter. Let’s clean up this latest round.

re: “That seems to be a bit of excessive hyperbole, don’t you think?”
Nope. You stacked more translations than a seminary bookstore and still didn’t disprove a thing. All you did was show that people laid up their offerings at home… which nobody is denying. What you didn’t do is answer why Paul designated the first day at all if it carried no special weight. Try again.

re: “Therefore, 1 Corinthians 16:2 is not an appropriate scripture for supporting the idea that the first day of the week was now a scripturally approved ongoing day for community rest and worship.”
And yet Paul still ties their giving to the first day. Not the Sabbath. Not payday. Not “whatever day you remember.” He picked resurrection day, the day Christ rose, the same day the early church gathered (Acts 20:7). Why? Because it was already a rhythmic marker in their lives. You want a direct command, but you’re ignoring the deliberate consistency that screams louder than a stone tablet.

re: “What has the Sabbath got to do with it?”
Everything. You’re out here defending a Saturday standard. We’re showing you how the Church was already operating on a new covenant timeline. The question isn’t “What does Paul say about the Sabbath?” The question is, why doesn’t he reaffirm it once? Not one time does Paul tell believers to honor the Sabbath, keep it holy, or structure their gatherings around it. Not once. That silence is deafening… and deliberate.

re: “That’s just speculation on your part.”
No, friend. That’s observation. When a pattern shows up repeatedly… Jesus rising, appearing, and the Church gathering on the same day… you don’t call it “coincidence.” You call it intentionality. That’s how doctrine works in the New Testament: watch the Spirit, follow the apostles, obey the Word.

re: “Still just your opinion.”
No, that’s the text. John 20:19 says Jesus came on the evening of the first day of the week. John 20:26 says eight days later, He did it again. You object to inclusive reckoning? Fine… then toss out every Jewish feast calculation in the Bible while you’re at it. It was their system, not mine. You don’t get to argue first-century events using twenty-first-century math.

re: “So, you’re saying that ‘after one day’ would be referring to Sunday?”
Nice try. Straw man rejected. I didn’t say “after one day” means the same day. I said “after eight days” in Jewish reckoning includes the day you start counting from. So from Sunday to the following Sunday? Eight days. This isn’t algebra. It’s just how Jews counted time.

re: “Mark 16:11 says they didn’t believe her.”
Exactly. And that’s the whole point: Jesus waited until they were gathered, even in unbelief, and then showed up. Because He wasn’t just revealing Himself… He was establishing a pattern. You’re assuming He had to wait for belief to appear. He waited for the gathering… just like He would do again.

re: “I don’t understand your point.”
The point is this:
Jesus could have appeared to His disciples individually that morning. He didn’t.
He could have appeared to them randomly throughout the week. He didn’t.
He waited for the evening of the first day, and then again eight days later, when they were gathered again.

The Gospels are showing you the blueprint of worship… but you keep looking for a permission slip signed “Sunday = New Sabbath” and won’t move until you get one. That’s not how the Spirit leads. You’re demanding Mosaic language in a Messiah-fulfilled era.

The New Testament Church didn’t need stone tablets to know when to gather.
They had the empty tomb, the risen Christ, and the Spirit of truth leading them.

You can keep chasing shadows.
We’ll be worshiping in the Light.

—Sincere Seeker. Scripturally savage. Here for the Truth.

158

The 4 th Commandment is to observe the Sabbath Day. Please note that Sabbath is the proper name of a specific day. In fact in any good translation the wording is “observe the Sabbath day”. While that is acceptable, it still misses the mark a tad because literally it reads, “observe the Shabbat”. The point is Shabbat is not just any day it is a specific day that the Lord has ordained as holy. Two things: it is defined Biblically as the 7 th day of the week, not the final day of any rolling 7 day period of OUR choosing. Nowhere in Scripture does it make it any other day. Further it is the HOLINESS of the day that is key. The Lord has set this particular day apart from all others and made it holy. Question: who makes something holy? Can YOU declare something to be holy? Can YOU take something ordinary and by the “power vested in you” make it holy? How about your Pastor; can he make something common into something holy? Of course not. Making something…..anything…..holy lies solely within the province of God.

We cannot choose any day we wish and then by our own authority declare it to be holy. The Sabbath is FAR MORE than a day of rest. If it were merely a day of physical rest then certainly it would not have the holy character YHWH has given it. Conversely any time we take a day off of work….for whatever reason……doesn’t make that day The Sabbath day. The pagan world had days off, and the government usually controlled which day that might be. They had days off to celebrate the winter and Summer solstices; they had days off to celebrate the inauguration of a new King; they had days off to celebrate and worship their numerous gods; they had days off to celebrate the end of the harvest season. They were rest days but they were not THE Sabbath. The Sabbath is a weekly observance of the miracle of Creation.

Look, it is rightly quoted that Jesus said that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. But the point is NOT that the sole PURPOSE of the Sabbath was so man would be able to take off a day of work, it was so man could enjoy and refresh his relationship with God. The time off was indeed helpful for man and animal to physically rejuvenate, but mostly it was so man could REMEMBER what the Lord has done for him by redeeming Him and by creating everything around man that sustains us. It does NOT do something for God that we rest; it honors God that we reflect upon Him and obey Him by observing the day that He has removed from the common days of the week and set it apart and blessed it as special.

159

Ahhh, but @Steppingstone …

One in your position might say to Jesus: “Look, Your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath!”

But Jesus would say:

“Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, he and those who were with him: how he entered the house of God and ate the showbread which was not lawful for him to eat, nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests? Or have you not read in the law that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are blameless? Yet I say to you that in this place there is One greater than the temple. But if you had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless. For the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.” (Matthew 12:2-8)

Are not the disciples of Jesus priests ( 1 Pet. 2:5 & 2:9, Rev1:6, 5:10) who, in Jesus, are blameless in bypassing the strict rules of Sabbath to obey Jesus?

Yet,

For this reason the Jews persecuted Jesus, and sought to kill Him, because He had done these things on the Sabbath. But Jesus answered them, “My Father has been working until now, and I have been working.” Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God. (John 5:16-18)

Isn’t the sin of murder (or murder contemplated (Matt 5:21-22)) exposed in judging others condemned for following their master Jesus who claimed equality with The Father and who did not keep the laws of Sabbath?

Jesus answers, and said to His critics,

"I did one work, and you all marvel. Moses therefore gave you circumcision (not that it is from Moses, but from the fathers), and you circumcise a man on the Sabbath.
If a man receives circumcision on the Sabbath, so that the law of Moses should not be broken, are you angry with Me because I made a man completely well on the Sabbath? Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment." (John 7:21-24)

If Jesus said The Father is working (every day) and so is He, should not the disciples of Jesus also do good works, even on The Sabbath, thus breaking the law of Sabbath? Should we not take this admonishment from the lips of our Savior seriously to judge with righteous judgement?

Now it was a Sabbath when Jesus made the clay and opened his eyes. Then the Pharisees also asked him again how he had received his sight. He said to them, “He put clay on my eyes, and I washed, and I see.” Therefore some of the Pharisees said, “This Man is not from God, because He does not keep the Sabbath.” Others said, “How can a man who is a sinner do such signs?” And there was a division among them. (John 9:14-16)

Does this division still ensue, accusing those who do not keep the law of Sabbath of not being from God, maintained and encouraged by those who believe they are keeping the law, and thus denigrate the disciples of Jesus for not keeping the law of sabbath?

So I say to all who are in Christ Jesus:

In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.
And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. Having disarmed principalities and powers, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them in it.

So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance (of sabbath) is of Christ.
Let no one cheat you of your reward, taking delight in false humility and worship of angels, intruding into those things which he has not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, and not holding fast to the Head, from whom all the body, nourished and knit together by joints and ligaments, grows with the increase that is from God.
Therefore, if you died with Christ from the basic principles of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations—(Colossians 2:11-20)

Therefore:

Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.
And whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him. (Colossians 3:16-17)

KP

160

In realty, the exact precise wording of the fourth commandment does not tell you which day of the week is the sabbath, it says that after six days of laborious occupation has passed, spend one day at worship without doing labor.

161

The movement came about from a group that twice predicted (and failed, obviously) the rapture. It was hard to keep it together until a seaman said they should worship on the Sabbath. It is pretty easy to point to the Old Testament and say, see, the Sabbath, despite Christianity making Sunday, the day of the Resurrection, the day of gathering, they are doing it all wrong!! God is going to send you to hell because gathering on an arbitrary day of the week is secretly worshipping Satan.

Christ was resurrected on a Sunday. Even a godless AI can figure it out: Christianity:

Sunday (the first day of the week) is often called the “eighth day,” symbolizing Christ’s resurrection and the start of a new creation, moving beyond the Sabbath’s rest into eternal life.