Announcement

Collapse

Christianity 201 Guidelines

orthodox Christians only.

Discussion on matters of general mainstream evangelical Christian theology that do not fit within Theology 201. Have some spiritual gifts ceased today? Is the KJV the only viable translation for the church today? In what sense are the books of the bible inspired and what are those books? Church government? Modern day prophets and apostles?

This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and Christians. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” or "orthodox" for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Additionally and rarely, there may be some topics or lines of discussion that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine (in general Christian circles or in the TheologyWeb community) or that deny certain core values that are the Christian convictions of forum leadership that may be more appropriately placed within Unorthodox Theology 201. NO personal offense should be taken by such discretionary decision for none is intended. While inerrancy is NOT considered a requirement for posting in this section, a general respect for the Bible text and a respect for the inerrantist position of others is requested.

The Tweb rules apply here like they do everywhere at Tweb, if you haven't read them, now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

A discussion with a Presbyterian on the Westminster Confession and the Sabbath

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • A discussion with a Presbyterian on the Westminster Confession and the Sabbath

    I had an interesting discussion today with a conservative Presbyterian on the keeping of the Lord's Day (I don't want to get bogged down by "well *actually*, the Sabbath is Saturday", not my point here). He pointed to the Westminster Confession of Faith, which is held to by many Reformed Christians, which does in fact forbid work and recreation on the Lord's Day.

    The Sabbath or Lord’s Day is to be sanctified by an holy resting all the day, from not only from such works as are at all times sinful, but even from such worldly employments and recreations as are on other days lawful;and making it our delight to spend the whole time (except so much of it as is to be taken up in works of necessity and mercy) in the public and private exercises of God’s worship and to that end, we are to prepare our hearts, and with such foresight, diligence, and moderation, to dispose and seasonably dispatch our worldly business, that we may be the more free and fit for the duties of that day.
    https://www.pcaac.org/wp-content/upl...ureProofs2.pdf

    His interpretation is that this means literally no work or recreation all day. This appears to be precisely what the Confession says. (It reminds me of the scene in the Little House on the Prairie books where everybody had to solemnly sit in the living room all day after church). He pointed to a commentary that allowed for fellowship if "pious conversation" is held. He also argued that this has been the consensus for nearly 2000 years of church history, dating back to the Gospel of Barnabas in the 1st century, up until recently, and the only exception he mentioned was Martin Luther. Now, I don't agree with this. Paul was fairly clear that we are not to judge others by our convictions on the Sabbath Day or if we think one day is holier than the other. So I'm fine saying that church history has largely gotten this one wrong. But that's not where things got weird.

    He also stated that anyone who subscribes to this creed brings condemnation on himself if they do not follow this. I pointed out that 99% of people in Reformed churches simply... don't do this. He granted the point and said that the Reformed, as well as the rest of the church, had fallen. This sort of "everyone is going to hell except me" logic just seems weird to me. Yet his point remains... so many churches do subscribe to this creed and appear to just ignore this part of it. That doesn't seem right either, and in my opinion, they should either stop saying the creed or completely follow the Sabbath.

    Anyone have thoughts?
    "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

  • #2
    Just think, I go grocery shopping on Saturday afternoon. Two miles drive in a six cylinder Hyundai running at about a thousand RPM. Just that alone means I probably violated the Sabbath about twelve thousand times just going to the grocery store.

    No, I am under no obligation whatsoever to adhere to the Sabbatical laws, whether Jewish or the Presbyterian Church's concept that God had somehow changed the day from Friday after sunset to Midnight Sunday morning. If I feel like doing a little work on Sunday, that's no problem. Writing two or more letters - does that include keystrokes? Today's Sunday, so I probably broke the Sabbath hundreds of times just typing this post.

    What Scripture can I quote? Romans 3:27-31; Romans 6:14; Romans 7:1-14; Romans 7:25; Romans 8:1-4; Romans 8:12-15; Galatians 2:16-19; Galatians 3:10-14; Galatians 3:23-25; Galatians 4:21-31; Galatians 5:1-4; Galatians 5:13-18; Ephesians 2:14-16; Colossians 2:14-17; Colossians 2:20-23; 1 Timothy 1:8-10.
    When I Survey....

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
      I had an interesting discussion today with a conservative Presbyterian on the keeping of the Lord's Day (I don't want to get bogged down by "well *actually*, the Sabbath is Saturday", not my point here). He pointed to the Westminster Confession of Faith, which is held to by many Reformed Christians, which does in fact forbid work and recreation on the Lord's Day.


      https://www.pcaac.org/wp-content/upl...ureProofs2.pdf

      His interpretation is that this means literally no work or recreation all day. This appears to be precisely what the Confession says. (It reminds me of the scene in the Little House on the Prairie books where everybody had to solemnly sit in the living room all day after church). He pointed to a commentary that allowed for fellowship if "pious conversation" is held. He also argued that this has been the consensus for nearly 2000 years of church history, dating back to the Gospel of Barnabas in the 1st century, up until recently, and the only exception he mentioned was Martin Luther. Now, I don't agree with this. Paul was fairly clear that we are not to judge others by our convictions on the Sabbath Day or if we think one day is holier than the other. So I'm fine saying that church history has largely gotten this one wrong. But that's not where things got weird.

      He also stated that anyone who subscribes to this creed brings condemnation on himself if they do not follow this. I pointed out that 99% of people in Reformed churches simply... don't do this. He granted the point and said that the Reformed, as well as the rest of the church, had fallen. This sort of "everyone is going to hell except me" logic just seems weird to me. Yet his point remains... so many churches do subscribe to this creed and appear to just ignore this part of it. That doesn't seem right either, and in my opinion, they should either stop saying the creed or completely follow the Sabbath.

      Anyone have thoughts?
      1) Quite a legalistic view from a group that's big on "Sola Gratia."

      2) The view elevates the creed to the point where it is virtually equal to Scripture itself. Not really in keeping with a group that is supposedly "Sola Scriptura."

      3) The longer and more detailed creeds become, the more likely they are to degrade into mere shibboleths for determining "in-group" and "out-group."

      4) To me, the guy seems like an extremist and a nutter.

      5) I do agree with you that people should not recite or "confess" things they don't really believe.

      6) My sensibilities are no doubt affected by the fact that I have never been part of a church that recites any creeds. I heard at best vague references to "creeds" for the first several years after I got saved (1980, age 19). That was in C&MA and Pentecostal churches. Technically, those churches had their own "creeds," but we called them "Statements of Faith (or Belief)," and we did not recite them. Around my mid-20s I heard about "reciting" the Apostles' Creed, and had the impression it was mainly something done by Catholics and Lutherans (Catholic Lite). I was probably about 30 when I became aware that there were many other creeds and confessions, and even a bit older when I realized people routinely recited them.
      Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

      Beige Federalist.

      Nationalist Christian.

      "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

      Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

      Proud member of the this space left blank community.

      Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.

      Justice for Ashli Babbitt!

      Justice for Matthew Perna!

      Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
        I had an interesting discussion today with a conservative Presbyterian on the keeping of the Lord's Day (I don't want to get bogged down by "well *actually*, the Sabbath is Saturday", not my point here). He pointed to the Westminster Confession of Faith, which is held to by many Reformed Christians, which does in fact forbid work and recreation on the Lord's Day.


        https://www.pcaac.org/wp-content/upl...ureProofs2.pdf

        His interpretation is that this means literally no work or recreation all day. This appears to be precisely what the Confession says. (It reminds me of the scene in the Little House on the Prairie books where everybody had to solemnly sit in the living room all day after church). He pointed to a commentary that allowed for fellowship if "pious conversation" is held. He also argued that this has been the consensus for nearly 2000 years of church history, dating back to the Gospel of Barnabas in the 1st century, up until recently, and the only exception he mentioned was Martin Luther. Now, I don't agree with this. Paul was fairly clear that we are not to judge others by our convictions on the Sabbath Day or if we think one day is holier than the other. So I'm fine saying that church history has largely gotten this one wrong. But that's not where things got weird.

        He also stated that anyone who subscribes to this creed brings condemnation on himself if they do not follow this. I pointed out that 99% of people in Reformed churches simply... don't do this. He granted the point and said that the Reformed, as well as the rest of the church, had fallen. This sort of "everyone is going to hell except me" logic just seems weird to me. Yet his point remains... so many churches do subscribe to this creed and appear to just ignore this part of it. That doesn't seem right either, and in my opinion, they should either stop saying the creed or completely follow the Sabbath.

        Anyone have thoughts?
        I think that the whole thing Jesus said, that the sabbath was made for man (Mark 2:27), and not the man for Sabbath applies here. Your friend sounds like he is being legalistic almost like the pharisees. And the confession itself seems overly legalistic. Probably written by someone lazy, like a pirate.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
          I had an interesting discussion today with a conservative Presbyterian on the keeping of the Lord's Day (I don't want to get bogged down by "well *actually*, the Sabbath is Saturday", not my point here). He pointed to the Westminster Confession of Faith, which is held to by many Reformed Christians, which does in fact forbid work and recreation on the Lord's Day.

          ...

          He also stated that anyone who subscribes to this creed brings condemnation on himself if they do not follow this. I pointed out that 99% of people in Reformed churches simply... don't do this. He granted the point and said that the Reformed, as well as the rest of the church, had fallen. This sort of "everyone is going to hell except me" logic just seems weird to me. Yet his point remains... so many churches do subscribe to this creed and appear to just ignore this part of it. That doesn't seem right either, and in my opinion, they should either stop saying the creed or completely follow the Sabbath.

          Anyone have thoughts?
          The guy almost has a point. If you are confessing all of that, you should do it. But he should not be judging people. That was one of the problems that happened under Judaism in the first century --i.e., people became judgmental of their neighbor -- a judge of the law that does not make one a doer of the law.

          The confession is too lengthy and thus is not practical. Only a narrow group of people should hold themselves to that -- not a broad set of churchgoers. Also, the amount of detail interferes with the ability to take a different stand based on scripture. Maybe it was "nice" to have an actual day of the week commonly set aside for rest. But people can also find that Christ is their rest and that Sunday might be taken more as a recommended physical practice due to the wisdom of God.

          I do agree with promoting at least the most basic creeds to be spoken at church once in awhile. There are at least some basic beliefs that distinguish the Christians from the Key Club. Something like the Apostles' Creed acts as a compact teaching of important point about Christianity. But when you get too detailed in beliefs, people can start disagreeing with details. Then the confession becomes a religious ritual instead of honest devotion toward God.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
            I had an interesting discussion today with a conservative Presbyterian on the keeping of the Lord's Day (I don't want to get bogged down by "well *actually*, the Sabbath is Saturday", not my point here). He pointed to the Westminster Confession of Faith, which is held to by many Reformed Christians, which does in fact forbid work and recreation on the Lord's Day.


            https://www.pcaac.org/wp-content/upl...ureProofs2.pdf

            His interpretation is that this means literally no work or recreation all day. This appears to be precisely what the Confession says. (It reminds me of the scene in the Little House on the Prairie books where everybody had to solemnly sit in the living room all day after church). He pointed to a commentary that allowed for fellowship if "pious conversation" is held. He also argued that this has been the consensus for nearly 2000 years of church history, dating back to the Gospel of Barnabas in the 1st century, up until recently, and the only exception he mentioned was Martin Luther. Now, I don't agree with this. Paul was fairly clear that we are not to judge others by our convictions on the Sabbath Day or if we think one day is holier than the other. So I'm fine saying that church history has largely gotten this one wrong. But that's not where things got weird.

            He also stated that anyone who subscribes to this creed brings condemnation on himself if they do not follow this. I pointed out that 99% of people in Reformed churches simply... don't do this. He granted the point and said that the Reformed, as well as the rest of the church, had fallen. This sort of "everyone is going to hell except me" logic just seems weird to me. Yet his point remains... so many churches do subscribe to this creed and appear to just ignore this part of it. That doesn't seem right either, and in my opinion, they should either stop saying the creed or completely follow the Sabbath.

            Anyone have thoughts?
            Isn't the Westminster Confession rather ...long to recite as a creed? I wasn't aware that anyone did that. He has a valid point about subscribing to a creed yet ignoring parts of it. The Reformed crowd can get really judgmental, though. There are some who will unhesitatingly call Calvin a heretic when shown that his beliefs differ from theirs.
            Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

            Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
            sigpic
            I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

            Comment


            • #7
              I've gotten a little more clarification since posting this. The distinction is apparently between the Sabbath and the Lord's Day. The Sabbath is not to be observed, but the Lord's Day is (the term does appear in Revelation 1:10). I still think Paul's comment about one person considering one day more holy than another would apply here, but I did find some citations from early church writings where the distinction was clearly understood, and the Lord's Day would be for rest but strictly not the Sabbath. The principle of the Sabbath being for man and not vice versa would probably still apply in the case of such stringent interpretations.

              "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                I had an interesting discussion today with a conservative Presbyterian on the keeping of the Lord's Day (I don't want to get bogged down by "well *actually*, the Sabbath is Saturday", not my point here). He pointed to the Westminster Confession of Faith, which is held to by many Reformed Christians, which does in fact forbid work and recreation on the Lord's Day.


                https://www.pcaac.org/wp-content/upl...ureProofs2.pdf

                His interpretation is that this means literally no work or recreation all day. This appears to be precisely what the Confession says. (It reminds me of the scene in the Little House on the Prairie books where everybody had to solemnly sit in the living room all day after church). He pointed to a commentary that allowed for fellowship if "pious conversation" is held. He also argued that this has been the consensus for nearly 2000 years of church history, dating back to the Gospel of Barnabas in the 1st century, up until recently, and the only exception he mentioned was Martin Luther. Now, I don't agree with this. Paul was fairly clear that we are not to judge others by our convictions on the Sabbath Day or if we think one day is holier than the other. So I'm fine saying that church history has largely gotten this one wrong. But that's not where things got weird.

                He also stated that anyone who subscribes to this creed brings condemnation on himself if they do not follow this. I pointed out that 99% of people in Reformed churches simply... don't do this. He granted the point and said that the Reformed, as well as the rest of the church, had fallen. This sort of "everyone is going to hell except me" logic just seems weird to me. Yet his point remains... so many churches do subscribe to this creed and appear to just ignore this part of it. That doesn't seem right either, and in my opinion, they should either stop saying the creed or completely follow the Sabbath.

                Anyone have thoughts?
                I am not an expert in this Confession. However, it is my understanding about the Sabbath that it is a day of rest and not a day of worship or a worship day. We should worship God whenever we are so inclined. Or, worship God all the time. It does make sense to get together with other believers for fellowship (and worship).

                Comment

                Related Threads

                Collapse

                Topics Statistics Last Post
                Started by alaskazimm, 12-01-2023, 06:46 PM
                6 responses
                38 views
                0 likes
                Last Post alaskazimm  
                Started by KingsGambit, 11-11-2023, 03:44 PM
                5 responses
                92 views
                0 likes
                Last Post KingsGambit  
                Started by Bill the Cat, 01-17-2014, 09:13 AM
                395 responses
                51,498 views
                0 likes
                Last Post Cow Poke  
                Working...
                X