Guess the Good Guy

[The Sabbath] is a creation ordinance.  And let me say right away that, if I didn’t believe that it was a creation ordinance, then I’d have a hard time believing that the Sabbath was still an ordinance that had validity for us today. I think because it was a creation ordinance, that it has validity as long as we human beings experience time as a succession of days — until the real Sabbath comes, and it hasn’t — it doesn’t come until we enter into God’s Sabbath rest with him at last. But until that time, there is a place within the experience of God’s people for this wonderful, prophetic representation and promise of where it’s all heading.  So because it’s a creation ordinance, I say it belongs to the whole process of the created order until we come to the consummation.

[Update] Wayne wins!  The answer is OHS MGK, and you can hear for yourself (about 2 minutes in).  Right after that quote, he continues, “Now, however, there are other features about it, that have to be noted.”  Particularly, the feature that the Sabbath is an eschatological promise only for God’s people, thus unbelievers can in no wise observe the Sabbath.  For more info, check out Lecture 5 here.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Guess the Good Guy, Sabbath. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to Guess the Good Guy

  1. St. Robert Bellarmine says:

    Zrim:

    I know this is off topic, but I hardly ever get to exchange ideas with Calvinist. Can you answer this question.: If the doctrine of Sol. Scrip. is found in the Bible,can you show me where?

    Thank You.

  2. Bruce S. says:

    I’ll answer for Zrim: Yes.

  3. Zrim says:

    St. Robert,

    First, I should point out this is Rube’s post and your question seems off topic.

    With that out of the way, I’d point you to WCF Chapter 1:

    http://www.reformed.org/documents/wcf_with_proofs/

    Or the Belgic Confession Articles 3, 5 & 7:

    http://www.reformed.org/documents/index.html?mainframe=http://www.reformed.org/documents/BelgicConfession.html

  4. St. Robert Bellarmine says:

    Zrim:

    How come you cannot answer my question directly? WCF, does not answer the my question. Most Calvinists assume Sol. Scr. is found in the Bible.

  5. Zrim says:

    SRB,

    I’m not sure what you’re looking for or what’s wrong with pointing to confessional standards which have biblical proofs. But if you want a chapter and verse that says, “Sola scriptura is what this book teaches,” it’s not in there.

    Yes, Reformed do believe SS naturally arises from holy writ. That usually is seen as a cop-out. But sola scriptura is our presupposition, not sola ecclesia.

  6. RubeRad says:

    Z, yer killin me! You know we have our own, fully-footnoted copies of the reformed standards here, right?

  7. Chris Donato says:

    Guess the good guy?

    One of a million Reformed theologians who fail to give a good rationale for switching the seventh-day Sabbath into a first-day affair? Or that the first-day gathering of the ekklesia incoporates “rest”? Or how along with the inauguration of the new creation in Christ this “creation ordinance” might have passed away? Or how the old covenant Sabbath is not tied effectively to what God did on the seventh day when he took up residence, as it were, within the cosmic temple he had just “created” (it’s analogous, yes, but does it institute the Sabbath)?

    Etc., etc.

  8. St. Robert Bellarmine says:

    Zrim:

    First off i thought it was your post about the Sab. Also I was bored with JJS blog about cov. theol., so I thought I would go over to your blog and pose this quetion.

    “Reformed do believe SS naturally arises from holy writ”

    But ” its not there.”

    That’s illogical. you are basing your doctrine (SS) that it is found in the Bible, but the Bible does not mention it? But you must believe that this doctrine is found in the Bible.

    You must base your presup. (SS), on scriptures, but your presups. are not even found in the scriptures.

    Also you guys believe SS is infallible, but then you show me your confessions, but you believe the WCF is not infall. How does that prove anything?

    My answer: what came into being first? The Church(RCC). Later the Canon of script. came 2nd. Calvinists do not believe in secondary causes.–That is the problem!!

    Christ working through his infall. Church gives to Mankind the canon of scripture.

  9. RubeRad says:

    What came first? The Scripture existed before the church could recognize it to be canonical. Although of course, the invisible church has been present ever since Gen 3:20 or so, and from then up to the Apostolic age, God’s special revelation progressively shaped and defined His People.

    “Reformed do believe SS naturally arises from holy writ.” But ” its not there.”

    Don’t be obtuse. Obviously what Z meant was the precise quotation “Sola Scriptura is what this book teaches” cannot be found in any one verse of scripture — any more than “Thou shalt baptize your babies” can be found in any one verse of scripture.

    So yes, we Reformed do believe SS naturally arises from holy writ. But if you’re looking for a comprehensive defense, I’m not your guy, any more than I’m your guy for arguing infralapsarianism vs. supralapsarianism. Maybe a different Outhouse sitter wants to wrassle, but otherwise, I’d suggest you take your shoulder and your chip elsewhere.

  10. RubeRad says:

    One of a million Reformed theologians…

    Yes, one of them. But you’ll have to be more specific if you want to win the contest!

  11. RubeRad says:

    fail to give a good rationale for switching the seventh-day Sabbath into a first-day affair?

    Actually, he’s got just as good reason as anybody else: Not only was Christ entered into his resurrection and completed his work, entering into the beginning of his rest on the 1st day (after resting in Death through the old Sabbath), as well as contrasting Ex 20:11 (looking from the end of the week back to creation at the beginning) with Deut 5:15 (looking from the beginning of the week forward to the consummation of our redemption at the last day)

  12. Zrim says:

    SRB,

    I think you have zeroed in on the precise, absolutely key difference between us: the relationship between scriptura and ecclesia. We hold that the Word creates the church (sola scriptura), you hold that the church creates the Word (sola ecclesia). All else flows out from these two major presuppositions.

    Whatever else recognizing this means, it helps each of us not to think of the other as incoherent.

  13. Phil Baiden says:

    The words “creation ordinance” I’ve only recently heard in RRC by R. Scott Clark. But this doesn’t sound like him.

    Am I anywhere close?

  14. RubeRad says:

    Yay! An actual guess!

    Not RSC. I have other purposes for putting this quote up there, but for this guy to describe the Sabbath as a creation ordinance may be kind of surprising to some.

  15. Phil Baiden says:

    Which means I’m nowhere near…

  16. Except (IRRC) MGK’s notion was that Sunday was not the sabbath but an “octave day”, eighth day celebration. A symbolic first step into eternity, as it were.

    I have also heard this from a Lutheran source (somebody on Issues, Etc.).

    My guess? I dunno. Scott Hahn? I read slowly anymore, have a life, and a job that doesn’t pay me to read theology. Sigh.

  17. RubeRad says:

    Wayne is correct! Was that so hard?

    My real purpose for this post was to publicize a quote that will be useful in an upcoming Hoagies & Stogies debate on the Sabbath. I figured, if I have to type it in, instead of just sending it in an email, I might as well put it out there for y’all to enjoy!

    As an added bonus, I can now go update this old post with some audio linkage.

  18. Todd says:

    For a more thorough treatment of Meredith’s Sabbath (which did change over time) view, you need to check out his final book “Gog, Heaven and Har Magedon” (pgs. 187-198). Kline argues that the Sabbath was never an aspect of the moral law on all men’s hearts, and he argues aginst identifying the first day of the week as the Christian Sabbath, or that the first day of the week is the fourth commandment applied in the NC.

  19. sean says:

    To piggyback on Todd’s elaboration, to insist the unbeliever observe the sabbath would be to essentially ask the unbeliever to observe the day in anticipation of his own destruction.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s