← Back to Faith In Action
What we are reading from: David Schrock Visit Site →
Set Apart for Worship: Ten Words about the Fourth Commandment
By David Schrock· September 21, 2026

Set Apart for Worship: Ten Words about the Fourth Commandment

In recent years, mental health has received an outsized emphasis in public discourse and pastoral care. And in the last month, as Lindsay Clancy’s murder case has made national news, mental health has again taken center stage. And it has raised the question: Is mental health a shield that blocks every judicial sentence? Or are there legal standards that mental health cannot deny? In a word, will justice or therapy prevail?

While you debate that question, consider this pastoral question that I received in a recent email:

Is mental health ever a legitimate excuse to not assemble regularly? If so, for how long? And under what conditions might the one suffering be permitted to remain absent? If not, how do you convince the one claiming mental health issues that refusing to gather is illegitimate?

How would you answer this question? And more specifically, how would you answer this question if you believe that the Sabbath is only a covenantal sign and not an abiding moral imperative to worship God?

According to a recent book on the Sabbath, the Fourth Commandment in its original context did not command worship. Therefore, today “the Bible does not mandate Sunday gatherings.”[1] For this author, the Sabbath Commandment is defined covenantally and delimited to the Mosaic Covenant, and so, because the New Testament does not require gathering on Sunday (a disputable point), the application of Fourth Commandment is found wholly in Christ. And for all those who are in him, Christians—even the weakest—have full access to Christ’s rest on every day.

On this basis, what might the pastoral counsel be to the member with mental health who refuses to come to church? Is there any moral imperative that commands the ailing saint to gather? Besides Hebrews 10:24–25 warning Christians to not forsake the assembling of believers, does the pastor have any moral grounds to say that refusal to gather for worship is sin? Or, is the pastor, who fears being legalistic with the Sunday gatherings, left with little more than sympathetic encouragement to come as soon as the member feels up to it?

At the end of a whole-Bible debate about the Sabbath, these are the practical questions that must be answered. And how one answers these questions reveals how good or bad their biblical theology is. And for all the ways that pastors and churches have fallen into the ditch of Sabbatarian legalism because they haven’t made sufficient distinctions between Israel and the church, the opposite error is also possible and perhaps more likely in our antinomian age.

As I will show in this essay, if Beau Landers’s new biblical theology on the Sabbath is to be followed, it will either offer nothing to call the Christian to gather for worship, or worse, it will give the weak member and her pastor a free pass to skip the Lord’s Day—all in the name of personally and ubiquitously enjoying the rest of Christ on all days.

A Debated Question

In the Decalogue, the Fourth Word commands Sabbath rest (Exod. 20:8–11, Deut. 5:12–15). All are in agreement with this point. Where debate arises is in how that original commandment to Israel relates to the rest of the Bible. When answering questions about the Sabbath, therefore, it is not enough to simply repeat the Decalogue. Rather, a whole Bible theology is necessary, one that moves from the seventh day in creation, to the patriarchs, through the story of Israel, to the person and work of Jesus, and finally to the new covenant church.

Because the Sabbath question invites an entire biblical theology, it is not easy to cover the subject with anything less than a multi-chapter book, or at least a multi-part essay.[2] For that reason, I will not attempt to address all the relevant questions related to the Sabbath. Instead, I will engage a portion of Beau Landers’ new book, and I will show why his biblical theology of the Sabbath moves too quickly to passages outside of Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5, with results that leave Christians with no moral imperative to gather for worship on a specific day.

For those familiar with the discussion, the Sabbath question is debated among Christians who agree on many other matters. Among Reformed Baptists, there are three primary views.[3] First, there are those who affirm the 1689 London Baptist and happily confess that the Fourth Commandment was “set apart for the worship of God” as “a positive, moral, and perpetual commandment.”[4] Second, there are those who hold to a form of New Covenant Theology and argue that “Christians are not bound to the Sabbath command,” nor does the Sabbath transfer to the Lord’s Day.[5] Then third, there are those who affirm Progressive Covenantalism stand somewhere in between.[6]

Ironically, Landers, or at least his British marketers, claim this third position, as do I. Yet, as it will become obvious, we have very different perspective on the imperatival nature of the Lord’s Day. I am closer to the 1689 Federalists, who affirm the command to worship on Sunday (“the Christian Sabbath”), while Landers denies any new covenant mandate to gather for worship on Sunday. In this sense, he is closer to New Covenant Theology, and one chief reason for his position is the way he defines the Sabbath independent of its liturgical significance as a command to take a day to worship God.

In what follows, I will engage his argument at that point. And I will do that in two steps. First, I will introduce his book, along with his arguments for seeing the Sabbath completely fulfilled in the person and work of Christ. This introduction is not intended to be a comprehensive review. Instead, it will familiarize the reader with his argument. Second, I will make the case, in ten points, that Exodus 20:8–11 (“Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy . . .”) is a command for Israel to worship God one day in seven. This is the what I am calling the liturgical purpose of the Sabbath.

Methodologically, I will argue on exegetical grounds (with Progressive Covenantal commitments) for a position that comes very close to the London Baptist Confession of Faith 22.7.[7] That is to say, I will argue that the Fourth Commandment was given to Israel to “be set apart for the worship of God,” which in the fulness of time leads the new covenant church to gather with Jesus Christ on the Lord’s Day, as his Spirit leads us in worship. As I engage Lander’s book, I will argue that the Fourth Commandment, in its original literary and covenantal context, commanded worship.

Christ Will Give You Rest: Sabbath Rest Without Mandated Worship

Writing from a perspective that straddles the line between progressive Covenantalism and new covenant theology, Beau Landers has written a book that argues for the Transferred Sabbath view.[8] Set against four other views, Landers argues that all days have been made holy in Christ.[9] More completely, he defines his position:

This view holds that in Christ’s fulfilling the law, he brings to eschatological realization what the sabbath command pointed to all along and by this transforms the command through its fulfillment. Jesus brings the pattern of the sabbath to its designed end and goal: a full and, eventually, final rest in him.[10]

Accordingly, Landers’ view does not require, as a moral mandate, a weekly Sabbath. Or, as Landers explains later, a Lord’s Day transfer.[11] Instead, coming to the end of his work, he says, “two things are certain: (1) the Bible does not equivocate the sabbath and Sunday; (2) the Bible does not mandate Sunday gatherings.”[12] To be clear, Landers affirms the goodness of gathered worship. But goodness is not the same thing as a moral imperative. Instead, he appeals to culture, saying, “Culturally, Sunday can and, in many cases, should be used as a day of corporate Christian worship. But this is merely an example set forth in the resurrection of Christ and a model of the early church.”[13]

For Landers, the Sabbath is all about the person of Christ, saying that the “authoritative and wise words in the sabbath command” should be applied to the lives of Christians “knowing that Jesus Christ fulfilled all of its covenantal obligations.”[14] Against this, I will argue that the imperative to remember the Sabbath and keep it holy is a command to worship God.

While the worship of God is different in the new covenant, as compared to the old (see John 4:21–25; Heb. 12:22–24), the command to worship God remains (Rev. 19:10). To obey that command, we must do more than honor God in our hearts (1 Pet. 3:15). We must gather with God’s people on a day set apart from worship (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:2; Rev. 1:10; cf. Heb. 10:19–25; 12:18–24), a moral imperative that Landers proposal undermines.

In ways that challenge Landers’ exegesis, I will make the case that more work needs to be done at the textual horizon of the Fourth Commandment, before one can proceed to the epochal or canonical horizon.[15] In other words, if it is improper to apply Exodus 20:8–11 to Christians today without recognizing the covenantal differences between Moses and Jesus, then it is also improper to jump from Exodus 20:8–11 to other passages of Scripture without putting in the work to understand what this commandment meant in its original context. Such thin exegesis is what Beau Landers has done in his defense of the Transformed View of the Sabbath.

Although he offers many theological insights, Landers “threefold purpose of the sabbath command” puts the ship off course from the beginning. His most important conclusion is this statement: “the Bible does not mandate Sunday gatherings.” That conclusion is a massive problem and it comes from his decision to separate the Fourth Commandment from worship.

By individualizing the Sabbath commandment to every Israelite, Landers makes it a matter of personal remembrance, not public worship. This can be seen in two ways. First, in his exegesis of Exodus 20:8–11, Landers abstracts the commandment by defining its first purpose theologically. Instead of dealing with the grammar of the Ten Words or the contents of the Fourth Commandment, Landers jumps to the theological conclusion that the commandment is about personally remembering God as Creator and Deliverer.[16] This need to remember God is no doubt true, but it is also exegetically shallow. Landers eventually examines Exodus 20:8, but only in the rearview mirror.[17] When he considers the covenantal purpose of the Fourth Commandment, he spends most of his time examining Exodus 31:12–17, the passage that speaks of the Sabbath as a sign.[18] By ordering his argument this way, he defines the Sabbath as a day when individual Israelites would remember God.[19] As a result, Israel, as collection of Sabbath-keepers, would set themselves apart from the nations and enjoy the communion with God.[20]

The problem here is not what Landers affirms, but what he denies—the place of corporate worship on the Sabbath. While acknowledging the way that the Sabbath ordered the calendar Israel, his commitment to the Sabbath as a day of remembrance and not worship is the root of the problem. And this problem grows throughout his work.

Second, Landers repeatedly divorces corporate worship from the Sabbath. For instance, describing Psalm 92, he writes, “The sabbath was not an obligatory act of temple worship but a part of their resting in the Lord.”[21] Likewise, when discussing the second temple, he states, “As established, the OT sabbath is not associated with regular ‘worship gatherings’ by the people, for it functioned primarily as a day of rest and, at most, priestly sacrificial activity in the temple.”[22] And with respect to the Lord’s Day, he denies that this day should be set aside as a requirement. “First, the correlation between sabbath and worship does not exist in the context of the Bible. The sabbath was a day of rest. This statement has been defended on multiple occasions throughout this work.”[23]

At the least, Landers is clear about his denial of corporate worship as an aspect of the Sabbath. Both for Israel and the church, Landers takes an individualistic approach to the Sabbath that leads him to deny any mandated worship gatherings on Sunday (or Saturday, for Israel). As a result, Landers position is closer to that of the New Covenant Theology which denies the Lord’s Day, even though his book promises a “progressive covenantal biblical-theological exploration of the Sabbath.”

Worship God: Ten Words about the Sabbath

As noted above, a proper treatment of the Sabbath requires a whole Bible theology. Space does not permit such a consideration here. Instead, I will offer a close reading of Exodus 20:8–11 to prove this one point: the Fourth Commandment requires corporate worship. This is its liturgical purpose.

As outlined above, this proposition directly opposes Beau Landers’s thesis. My position echoes the Second London Confession of Faith, which calls for the Lord’s Day to be “set apart for the worship of God” (22.7). Thus, on Progressive Covenantal principles of interpretation, I will argue for the Lord’s Day as a day to gather for worship and to approach Mount Zion to enter the rest which Jesus now enjoys.

Short of defending that full position, I will offer ten words on Exodus 20:8–11 that prove that this commandment, in its original context, called Israel to rest from their ordinary labors in order to worship God as a kingdom of priests. Clearly, more needs to be said in order to move from Sinai to today, but we cannot make the journey through Scripture if we do not properly understand the original commandment. And so, to that end, I write.

First, the historical context of Mount Sinai makes the Ten Commandments a “document” received in worship and given for worship.

Undeniably, God gave Moses the Ten Words as Israel came to worship God at his holy mountain. But did he give the Ten Words for the purpose of worship? For at least three reasons, the liturgical context of Exodus 19–24 leads us to see worship as a primary (but not isolated) goal for the Decalogue.

First, in Exodus 1–18, the purpose of Israel’s assembly at Sinai is identified as worship. God first called Moses to lead Israel to Sinai so that they would “serve God on this mountain” (Exod. 3:12). As it is commonly observed, the language of serving the Lord is a primary way Scripture speaks of worship (cf. Gen. 2:15; Exod. 20:5; 2 Kgs. 17:41; Ps. 100:2; Rom. 12:1).[24] In Exodus, Moses’ request for Pharaoh to “let my people go” is always for this purpose: to serve God at Mount Sinai (Exod. 3:12; 4:23; 7:16; 8:1, 20; 9:1, 13; 10:3; cf. 10:7; 12:31), specifically to offer sacrifices (Exod. 3:18; 5:3), and to hold a feast with God in the wilderness (Exod. 5:1).

Second, the call to worship is for the whole assembly (Exod. 10:9). In the middle of Moses’s negotiations, Pharaoh permits the men to depart (Exod. 10:11), but this is not enough; the whole assembly that is required to worship. After the plague of locusts, Pharaoh permits all the people to go, but not the animals (Exod. 10:24), which means that sacrifices would be withheld. Again, Moses refuses (Exod. 10:25). Why? Because the assembly at Sinai is a service of worship for the whole nation.

Finally, Moses says in Exodus 10:26 that he will be told how to worship God when they arrive. He argues, “Our livestock also must go with us; not a hoof shall be left behind, for we must take of them to serve the LORD our God, and we do not know with what we must serve the LORD until we arrive there.” This tells us clearly that the words that God reveals at Sinai are for ordering Israel’s worship. Thus, the Ten Commandments are given in the context of a worship service and, more importantly, they are given for the purpose of ordering worship in Israel. In all, this means that the Ten Words are given in the context of worship and for the purpose of worship.

Second, the placement of the Sabbath commandment in the Decalogue orients Israel to worship God.

Moving from the context in which the Ten Words were received to the content of those words, we come to the ten words themselves, which are often divided into the two tables of the Law—the first four commandments oriented to God and the second six oriented towards man.

I agree with Ardel Caneday, who follows Meredith Kline and others, that the two tablets are two copies of the same law—one for the King (Yahweh), the other for his vassal (Israel).[25] This was customary in the ancient Near East, and it makes the best sense of the “two tablets of testimony.”[26] The significance of reading “two tablets” as two copies, and not two parts of the one law, is that it stresses the unity of the Decalogue. And it also invites us to read these words according to their original literary context, which groups laws for worship (loving God) in the first half, with laws related to ethics (loving neighbor) in the second half.

In particular, we find four negations preceding the Fourth Commandment: (1) You shall have no other gods before me; (2) You shall not make for yourself a carved image; (3) You shall not bow down to them or serve them; and (4) You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain (Exod. 20:3–7).[27] All four of these prohibitions are about worship, suggesting that the Sabbath is about worship, too.

The negation that is least obviously about worship (“You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain”) becomes clear when we read Deuteronomy. As Joshua Philpot reminds us, Deuteronomy 6–26 expounds the Ten Words in order.[28] The section explaining the third commandment (Deut. 13–14) provides detailed instructions for avoiding false teachers and their false gods (Deut. 13:1–18) and remaining a people holy to the Lord (Deut. 14:1–29; esp. 14:2, 21).[29] These are principles of worship. True worship under the old covenant, much like today, depends on true teaching and holy living. And thus, the Third Commandment, like the First and the Second is clearly related to worship.

Equally, the Fifth Commandment pertaining to fathers and mothers is also about worship. First, by comparison to Deuteronomy 6:4–9, we know that parents have the primary responsibility to lead their children in worship. Under the old covenant, parents passed on the stories of God’s faithfulness to their children, for the purpose of their grandchildren (see Ps. 78). And even under the new covenant, Christian parents have an obligation to raise their children in the fear and admonition of the Lord (Eph. 6:4). Thus, the command to honor one’s father and mother is not simply a familial good; it is also the way that one generation comes to worship the God of their fathers. This explains, in part, the promise of enduring in the land (Exod. 20:12). Children in Israel can only remain in the land, if they continue to worship the God of their fathers (cf. Dan. 9:4–7).[30] Hence, honoring fathers is closely connected to worship.

Similarly, Deuteronomy 16:18–18:22 expounds the Fifth Commandment by considering all types of authorities in Israel: judges, priests, kings, and prophets. When we consider the way that these mediators were to facilitate and encourage worship in Israel, we can see how the Fifth Commandment maintained worship in Israel from generation to generation.

Set in this literary context, there is good reason to see the Fourth Commandment as continuing to instruct the people how to worship God. God gives instructions on who to worship (First Commandment), how not to worship (Second Commandment), how to worship (Third Commandment), and how to preserve worship (the Fifth Commandment), and when to worship (Fourth Commandment). Thus, the Fourth Commandment is about when to worship and what not do on the day that is set apart for worship.

Understandably, the arrangement of Ten Words and the surrounding commandments cannot prove by itself that the Fourth Word is about worship. But the burden of proof lies with the interpreter who denies any connection between the Sabbath and gathered worship, a burden that Landers does not take up because he skims over Exodus 20 to get to other passages. By contrast, I will continue to make the case that the Fourth Commandment gives instructions for gathered worship, a point that will be strengthened as we look to the words of Exodus 20:8–11.

Third, “remember the Sabbath” is a call to gather for worship.

If one follows Landers’ arguments, he might conclude that “remember the Sabbath” is merely a call to individually and privately remember all that God did. After all, that is what the text says. Yet, on the lips of Moses, who is led by the Holy Spirit, the word “remember” carries far more significance for the whole assembly. And if we are going to see the connection between Sabbath rest and gathered worship, we need examine the word.

First, the word remember (zkr) is used to point back to events that came prior to the giving of the Ten Words. While that remembrance could merely point back to the introduction of the Sabbath in Exodus 16, it seems more likely that the remembrance goes back to the beginning and the pattern of six days of work followed by one day of creation because the passage references God’s creative work in Genesis 1:1–2:3. Still, the point to be made here is more than the direction of the day, it is the activity of the day. What does God expect when the day is remembered?

The answer to that question is in some ways answered by the appeal to creation (Exod. 20:11) and later by the appeal to redemption (Deut. 5:15). On the Sabbath, God is to be remembered. This is the theological purpose that Landers rightly highlights. Yet he fails to go further and consider the other use of the word “remember” in Exod. 20, the promise that God will cause his name to be remembered.

In the flow of Exodus, God gives the Ten Words to Moses (Exod. 20:1–17) and the people tremble at his presence (Exod. 20:18–21). What comes next is pivotal for understanding the place of the Ten Commandments in the life of Israel, because it goes beyond Mount Sinai. In Exodus 20:22–26, God gives instructions for building an altar on the mountain, but then the Lord speaks about “every place” where he causes his name to be remembered.

These words not only confirm our understanding that the Ten Commandments were given in a worship service, but they reinforce the point that the Ten Commandments were given for worship. For in these verses, Yahweh says, “An altar of earth you shall make for me and sacrifice on it your burnt offerings and your peace offerings, your sheep and your oxen. In every place where I cause my name to be remembered I will come to you and bless you” (Exod. 20:24). Notice the tight connection between the altar, which is the place of worship, and the remembrance of God’s name. Remembering the name of God is not limited to personal, cognitive recollection. Remembering the name of the Lord is assigned to the altar. The altar is the place where the name of the Lord is remembered, because the altar is the place where the Lord is worshiped. Later, Deuteronomy 12 describes how God will put his name upon the place where the temple will be built. And thus, when Israel enters the land, the name of the Lord will be remembered to the degree that worship occurs at the altar of God.

Notice that when God causes his name to be remembered, He will bless his people (Exod. 20:24). This promise of blessing comes from the people remembering the name of the Lord in worship. And how do they do that? First, because God causes them to remember his name. But proximately, they remember his name and receive his blessing by worshiping on the Sabbath.

The only commandment that speaks of God’s blessing is the Fourth Commandment (Exod. 20:11), and not coincidentally, this is the day set apart (made holy) for remembrance.[31] That remembrance is more than personal reflection by means of physical rest. Rather, remembrance involves the whole matrix of blessing, altars, and sacrifices. In other words, remembrance is defined as worshiping God. Six days shall you labor, and one day shall you rest, so that you may enjoy the blessing that comes from the altar.[32]

Fourth, “keep [the Sabbath] holy” calls Israel to be a kingdom of priests.

If it is not evident yet, “remember the Sabbath” is tightly connected to the identification of Israel as a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. As Landers rightly observes, the surrounding nations will recognize that holiness of Israel when they keep the Sabbath.[33] Yet, it is unlikely that personal Sabbath-keeping that possessed no outward, visible expressions would communicate anything of substance to other nations. By contrast, if the whole nation put aside their ordinary labors every Sabbath in order to attend holy worship, this would reveal the ways in which Israel was God’s chosen people, a holy nation, and a kingdom of priests.

Now, as I have argued elsewhere, the nation’s original status as a kingdom of priests was corrupted when the sons of Israel invited Aaron to sin with the golden calf.[34] As a result, the Levites replaced the firstborn sons (Exod. 32:25–29; Num. 3:40–51), and the kingdom of priests became a kingdom with priests. Notably, this glorious title found in Exodus 19:6 is never applied to the nation again—not until a new Israel is formed new in Christ (see 1 Pet. 2:5–9). Nevertheless, the Ten Commandments offer a vision for God’s people, where on a weekly basis they turn their attention to the Lord in worship. In this way, the Sabbath is more than a command to rest. It is a command to cease all ordinary work and to attend to the priestly calling of Israel.

We can look to the Passover to understand this priestly service. In Exodus, the Passover was an event that called the heads of households to act like priests. And each year, when the Passover was celebrated, the father took on this priestly role within his family. Notably, after the weekly Sabbath is put on the calendar in Leviticus 23:3, the very next verse speaks of the Passover (Lev. 23:4–8). This annual festival started the new year, and importantly, it was called a holy convocation (Lev. 23:4), just like the Sabbath (Lev 23:2). Indeed, when the LORD defines the Sabbath in Leviticus, here is what he says, “Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day is a Sabbath of solemn rest, a holy convocation. You shall do no work. It is a Sabbath to the LORD in all your dwelling places.”

Notice the way “holy convocation” stands epexegetically to “solemn rest.” That means that the first term is defined by the second: the Sabbath day of rest is a “holy convocation.” By comparison to the Passover in Leviticus 23:4, we can see that a holy convocation is meant to be an appointed feast to the Lord. Now, without making the error of defining weekly Sabbaths as something like a weekly Passover, we should let the parallel concepts of the Sabbatical calendar shape our understanding of how Israel was to rest. The call to rest was not merely a time to cease activity and contemplate God as Creator and Redeemer; it was a day to put aside ordinary work and participate in priestly worship.

Fifth, the instructions about work and rest call Israel to put aside ordinary work to pick up priestly work.

If the priestly argument for the Sabbath commandment is not clear by comparing Exodus 20 to Exodus 19 and Leviticus 23, we can turn to Deuteronomy 5. When Moses repeats the Ten Commandments, the command to keep the Sabbath is strengthened in Deuteronomy 5:12. Whereas Exodus 20:8 lacks an imperative, Deuteronomy 5:12 changes the word and the verb tense to stress the commandment. In the second case, when Moses writes, “observe the Sabbath,” he does not use the word “remember” (zkr) but “keep/guard” (šmr). This word change reinforces the priestly nature of the commandment.

Going back to Genesis 2:15, the word for “guard” (šmr) is one of two commands given to Adam in the garden. The other is “serve” (abd). The full verse reads, “The LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it.” As many scholars have noted, this double commandment identifies Adam as a priest who is placed in the garden to serve and guard the holy place of God.[35] The connection to priesthood is found by the use of these two terms together in places like Numbers 3:7–8 and 18:7.

Yet, it is also possible to treat these words individually. And one place they are separated comes immediately after the Fall in Genesis 3. In that passage, God “sent [the man] out from the garden of Eden to work the ground from which he was taken” (Gen. 3:23), but nothing is said of him guarding or keeping. Clearly, his priestly duties have been lost, or drastically reduced, as his access to the garden of Eden has been cut off. By contrast, in the next verse, cherubim have entered the scene and are given the task of guarding the garden sanctuary (Gen. 3:24).

Holding this observation loosely, it is noteworthy that what was joined together in the garden, working and keeping, is now separated. And if this has any bearing on the Fourth Commandment, it looks like this: the kingdom of priests will do ordinary work six days a week, until the Sabbath, when they return to the garden sanctuary to worship God. Only now, instead of being accepted into the inner precincts of the sanctuary, the men of Israel must remain at a distance, where a whole system of priests and Levites serve as their mediators.

If this priestly reading is correct, it may explain why there is no evidence of Sabbath among the patriarchs. Mankind cannot enjoy the Sabbath unless God is dwelling with his people. In Eden, this was certainly the case, and the Lord came to rest and be refreshed on the seventh day (Gen. 2:1–3; Exod. 31:17). Yet, after the Fall, we see no place where God rested, until Israel came to Sinai. Thus, the Sabbath could return to Israel, because the Lord was present and his people were called into priestly service again.

To reinforce this point, we can observe how Moses distinguishes ordinary work from sacred work. Technically, sacred work would be anything that happened in the temple. Sacred work is priestly work. Those who serve in the presence of God must be (and are) set apart as holy.

While the people of Israel could not elevate themselves to be priests (see the case of Korah in Numbers 16), on days set apart for “holy convocations” they were invited (read: commanded) to attend the works of God’s temple, even if they were not priests themselves. As both Leviticus 23 and Numbers 28–29 frame it, the people could not do “ordinary work” during these days.[36] Again, this parallels the Sabbath command on which ordinary work was also not permitted. Why? Because this was the day that was set apart as holy, just as the Fourth Commandment observed.

Indeed, for a kingdom of priests to be a holy nation they needed to keep the Sabbath by doing priestly work. This is exactly the idea of Exodus 20:9–10a, “Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God.”

Sixth, the Sabbatical Calendar of Exodus 23 is dedicated to worship.

Thus far, I have focused my attention on the historical and literary context of the Fourth Commandment, as well as the content of Exodus 20:8–11, but we can look further. And that begins by looking at Exodus 23:10–19.

As the organization of Exodus 19–24 goes, Exodus 19:1–8 provides an outline of all that comes next. And based upon the outline offered by John Davies, we can divide the actual covenant-making event at Sinai into three parts.[37]

The Lord of the Covenant (Exod. 19:9–25)

The Words of the Covenant (Exod. 20:1–23:33)

The Blood of the Covenant (Exod. 24:1–18)

Without getting into all the details, we can note a distinction in the text between the Ten Commandments (Exod. 20:1–17) and the ensuing rules (Exod. 21:1–23:33), with stipulations for mediation and worship standing in between (Exod. 20:18–26). Confirming this reading, Exodus 24:3 identifies the “words” and the “rules”: “Moses came and told the people all the words of the LORD and all the rules. And all the people answered with one voice and said, “All the words that the LORD has spoken we will do.”

Identifying these parts of Exodus 19–24 solidifies the relationship between the Fourth Commandment and the Sabbatical Calendar of Exodus 23:10–19: the latter amplifies and applies the Sabbath commandment in the context of the Mosaic Covenant. And what we find in these ten verses are three ways the Sabbath Commandment is related to worship.

First, in the context of the Sabbatical Calendar, Moses offers a clear denunciation of false worship in Exodus 23:13: “Pay attention to all that I have said to you, and make no mention of the names of other gods, nor let it be heard on your lips.” While this judgment is stands closer to the language of the First and Third Commandments, the context of Exodus 23:10–19 reinforces the liturgical purpose of the Sabbath.

Second, in ways that anticipate the larger discussion of the Sabbatical Calendar in Leviticus 23 and Numbers 28–29, Moses moves from the Sabbath day (Exod. 23:12) to the Sabbath year (Exod. 23:11) and three other festivals (Exod. 23:14)—the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Exod. 23:15; cf. Lev. 23:4–8), the Feast of the Harvest (Exod. 23:16a; cf. Lev. 23:9–21), and the Feast of the Ingathering (Exod. 23:16b). While these festivals do not involve every citizen in Israel, but only the men (Exod. 23:17), they are undeniably holy convocations set apart for worship.

Finally, Exodus 23:18–19 gives instructions for sacrifices. “You shall not offer the blood of my sacrifice with anything leavened, or let the fat of my feast remain until the morning. The best of the firstfruits of your ground you shall bring into the house of the LORD your God.” These instructions typify the kind of worship Israel was to pursue on the days set apart as holy. Thus, while the Fourth Commandment only uses language that is suggestive of worship (see points 3–5 above), it is misguided to divorce the Sabbath day from worship. For as Moses expounds the meaning of the Sabbath, there is clearly a liturgical purpose. In Exodus 23 this is evident, but also in Deuteronomy 14:22–16:17.

Seventh, Moses exposition of the Sabbath in Deuteronomy details its liturgical purpose.

In Deuteronomy, Moses recites the Ten Words (Deut. 5:6–21) and then proceeds to explain how each commandment is understood and applied in Deuteronomy 6–26. In short, each commandment receives its own specific treatment. And in Deuteronomy 14:22–16:17, Moses focuses on the Fourth Commandment.[38] And what does he address?

First, Deuteronomy 14:22–29 focuses on tithing. Specifically, Moses calls for Israel to collect tithes to finance worship. This is evident in verse 26, when he says, “spend the money [collected in the tithe] for whatever you desire—oxen or sheep or wine or strong drink, whatever your appetite craves. And you shall eat there before the LORD your God and rejoice, you and your household.” Indeed, eating in the presence of the Lord is the pinnacle of worship (cf. Exod. 24:9–11) and in this section, Moses connects working in the field to eating before the Lord. Similarly, in verses 27–29 he calls on Israel to provide for the Levites who serve Israel by connecting the priests to the people. Further, the Levites are the ones tasked to assist the priests (Num. 3:9; 8:19; 18:6–7) and teach the people of Israel the law of God (Deut. 33:10). In short, the Levites are the ones who will be sent throughout the land (Num. 35:1–8), to instruct the nation how to approach God.[39] This too is related to worship, and it shows another way that the Sabbath has a liturgical purpose. The tithe is collected so that on the Sabbath, the people of Israel will not need to do ordinary work. Instead, they will be able to rest and give their attention to God.

Next, in Deuteronomy 15:1–23 Moses gives instructions for slaves and their masters. This too develops the Fourth Commandment, as the Sabbath commandment is given to households, not just individuals. As Deuteronomy 5:14 says of the Sabbath,

On it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter or your male servant or your female servant, or your ox or your donkey or any of your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates, that your male servant and your female servant may rest as well as you.

The ethical import of the Sabbath is more than an obligation to take rest for oneself; the command is to give rest.[40] And that is exactly what is happening in Deuteronomy. But we can say more. The reason why masters must give rest to all those who are in their household is so that they can eat before the Lord (Deut. 15:20). This eating in God’s presence is the pinnacle of worship. And in Deuteronomy 14:22–16:17, the idea shows up repeatedly (Deut. 14:23, 26; 15:20; 16:11, 16 [2x]).

Finally, Moses finishes his explanation of the Fourth Commandment in Deuteronomy 16:1–17, as he returns to the Sabbath Calendar. In order, he details the Passover (Deut. 16:1–8), the Feast of Weeks (Deut. 16:9–12), and the Feast of Booths (Deut. 16:13–17). Similar to Exodus 23:10–19, this passage connects the Sabbath to the system of festivals that order Israel’s worship. In each of these festivals, the men of Israel will gather in the Lord’s presence to offer sacrifices and eat before the Lord (Deut. 16:16–17). These festivals are tied to historical events in Israel’s history, and thus they reinforce the fact that the Sabbath, and all the festivals on the calendar, are given to remember God’s works in history and to lead the people to worship him for those works.

When we look at Moses’s own exposition of the Fourth Commandment it becomes undeniable that the Sabbath is for worship. Yet, Beau Landers does not consider this vital section in his otherwise thorough review of the biblical data. One wonders how he might have changed his thesis if he treated these three chapters of Deuteronomy?

Eighth, the Sabbath always included sacrifices.

Lest we think that the annual festivals are days of worship, but the weekly is Sabbath not, we only need to look at Numbers 28–29 to consider the ways in which the Sabbath was a time of liturgical sacrifice. In Exodus 23 and Leviticus 23, we find the Sabbatical calendar, but in Numbers 28–29 we find a detailed description of the sacrifices that were offered. In order, Moses reports the daily offerings (Num. 28:1–9), the Sabbath offerings (Num. 28:9–10), monthly offerings (Num. 28:11–15), offerings for the Passover (Num. 28:16–25), offerings for the Feast of Weeks (Num. 28:26–31), offerings for the Feast of Trumpets (Num. 29:1–6), offerings for the Day of the Atonement (Num. 29:7–11), and offerings for the Feast of Booths (Num. 29:12–38).

Worship in Israel was a bloody affair. Animal sacrifices marked every occasion where Israel drew near to the Lord. As Hebrews 9:22 puts it, “under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.” And importantly, this includes sacrifices offered on the Sabbath. As Numbers 28:9–10 instructs the priests, “On the Sabbath day,” they were to offer “two male lambs a year old without blemish, and two tenths of an ephah of fine flour for a grain offering, mixed with oil, and its drink offering: this is the burnt offering of every Sabbath, besides the regular burnt offering and its drink offering.”

Indeed, even if we accepted Landers argument that the people of Israel did not worship the Lord on the Sabbath, the priests did! And because the priests represented the people, God’s covenant people did worship God on the Sabbath, at least at the sanctuary.

In fact, Jesus would acknowledge this fact in Matthew 12:5, when he said to the Pharisees, “Or have you not read in the Law how on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath and are guiltless?” It seems Jesus has Numbers 28:9–10 in mind when he makes the point that on the Sabbath, Israel’s priests did work in the sanctuary. And by comparison to the rest of Numbers 28–29, these priests enjoyed the blessing of holy service on the Sabbath.

Again, because the people took time on the Sabbath to lift their eyes from their ordinary work, Sabbath-keeping would have (or should have) included something more than physical rest. Worship was the order of the day, as Numbers 28:9–10 reminds us. Yet, even before the tabernacle was constructed, the Sabbath was a day of worship, and we can see this when we read Exodus 16 with Exodus 33.

Ninth, Exodus 16 initiates the Sabbath as a day of worship.

Returning to Exodus, we come to the first place that the Sabbath is mentioned by name: Exodus 16. In a chapter that describes the gift of manna, or “bread from heaven” (Exod. 16:4), the Lord gives Israel very particular instructions. Gather manna for six days and rest on the seventh (Exod. 16:4–5, 22–26). Yet, to facilitate this pattern of work and rest that mirrors creation (Gen. 1:1–2:3) and anticipates the Fourth Commandment (Exod. 20:8–11), the Lord promises a double portion of bread on the sixth day (Exod. 16:5).

On this basic pattern of work and rest in Exodus 16, everyone agrees. Where disagreement arrives is in assessing the relationship between this event, the Fourth Commandment, and the creation narrative. Is this “law” of the Sabbath, mentioned in Exodus 16:4, a prefiguration of the Mosaic covenant? Or does this weekly Sabbath recover something lost in creation? Answering these questions is perhaps the first order of business in developing a biblical theology of the Sabbath, but to the disappointment of all who have made it this far, I’ll save my answer for another essay. For now, I simply want to show why this weekly Sabbath is not merely a day of rest, but a day of worship.

Consider, first, how the double portion of manna invites thanksgiving and praise. In general, any time the Lord works on behalf of his people in a miraculous way, the proper response is worship. This is evident in multiple ways. For instance, when Israel “heard that the LORD had visited the people of Israel and that he had seen their affliction, they bowed their heads and worshiped” (Exod. 4:31). Similarly, when God provided a Passover lamb, “the people bowed their heads and worshiped” (Exod. 12:27). And again, when God divided the Red Sea and saved Israel from Egypt, the people sang God’s praises. As Psalm 106:12 says of Exodus 14–15, “Then they believed his words; they sang his praise.” These three moments of worship suggest that God’s weekly provision would prompt worship on the Sabbath.

Now, as it turns out, the people fail to properly worship God for his provision of manna. Instead, Exodus 16:8–22 records how they grumble and mishandle the bread from heaven. Nevertheless, the command is clear—the people of Israel are to gather manna for six days and rest on the seventh. And what are they to do on the seventh? Exodus 16:29 tells us. They are to “Remain each of you in his place; let no one go out of his place on the seventh day.” Rebuking those who went out to gather manna on the seventh day (Exod. 16:27–28), Moses is reinforcing the law of the Sabbath. And specifically, he is restricting the people to their tents. But what are they supposed to do at their tents? They are to worship.

Again, this answer fits with the established pattern worship following God’s miraculous works, of which the manna and its double portion were. But also, the limitation of the people to their tents suggests something else—that on the Sabbath, the people were to look out upon the glory of God.

Exodus 16 not only introduces God’s provision of manna, but it also introduces the visible manifestation of God’s glory. While God had revealed himself to Moses at the burning bush (Exod. 3:1–6) and proceeded to show his power through ten plagues, the Passover, and the Red Sea event, Exodus 16 is the first place where God’s glory is seen. In Exodus 16:7, Moses says that Israel will see the glory of the LORD, and in Exodus 16:10, we read, “And as soon as Aaron spoke to the whole congregation of the people of Israel, they looked toward the wilderness, and behold, the glory of the LORD appeared in the cloud.”

Now, there is some ambiguity as to the day when the glory of the LORD appeared, but it is undeniable that the glory cloud, which will lead Israel to Sinai (Exod. 24:15), first appears here. And on this basis, I take it that when Israel remained in their tents, eating bread from heaven, they could do nothing but look out from their tent and behold the glory of God, an action undeniably associated with worship (see Exod. 33:18–34:8; cf. Pss. 29:1–2; 63:2–4; 2 Chr. 7:1–3).

Now, some might argue that this is reading of Exodus 16 is speculative, not conclusive. But consider what Exodus 33:8–10 says,

Whenever Moses went out to the tent, all the people would rise up, and each would stand at his tent door, and watch Moses until he had gone into the tent. When Moses entered the tent, the pillar of cloud would descend and stand at the entrance of the tent, and the LORD would speak with Moses. And when all the people saw the pillar of cloud standing at the entrance of the tent, all the people would rise up and worship, each at his tent door.

Notice the occasion of Moses mediation, the location of the people, and their corresponding action. Taking the priestly role of a mediator, Moses regularly entered the “tent of meeting” which stood “outside the camp.” When this happened, God’s glory cloud descended and the people of Israel worshiped God in their tents. Putting all of this together, it doesn’t take much imagination to see how this worship would have been commonplace, and how it fits with the commandment to keep the Sabbath.

In fact, as the people were constrained to their tents on the seventh day, what could they do but eat, drink, and enjoy the glory of the Lord? If this kind of worship was not what the Sabbath was meant to enjoin, then I do not know what the purpose of the Sabbath was, except to banish the people to remain inside their tents. On Landers reading of the Sabbath, he denies any such liturgy. But as I have attempted to show, worship was the chief design of the Fourth Commandment.

Tenth, the Sabbath signifies a system of worship under the Covenant at Sinai.

Finally, Exodus 31 establishes the fact that the Fourth Commandment is a command to worship God. As Beau Landers observes, Exodus 31:12–17 ascribes to the Sabbath a covenantal purpose.[41] Covering more than twenty pages, he effectively defines the Fourth Commandment by this sign function of the Sabbath. It is in this section that he attends to the language of Exodus 20:8–11 and it is where he gives his positive vision for Sabbath.

Using alliteration (“remember 🡪 respond 🡪 result”), he argues that the Sabbath would “[1] remind [Israel] that Yahweh was their sovereign sanctifier (31:13), so that [2] they would respond by keeping the sabbath holy (31:14–16), so that [3] it would result in communion with Yahweh under his kingship (31:17).[42]

As with his theological purpose, these three “steps,” as he labels them, are generally correct and include many biblical insights. Yet, they lack exegetical precision. As a result, Landers misses the way Exodus 31:12–17 reinforces the Sabbath’s liturgical purpose. And so, in my final argument, I will show why “the Sabbaths” (plural) is the sign that marks out Israel as the people who worship God. Let me prove this point in five ways.

First, the Sabbath is the Lord’s.

While it is often argued that the Sabbath is Israel’s covenant sign, it more correct to say that the Sabbath is the Lord’s and that Israel is keeping his Sabbath. Like the sign of the rainbow (Gen. 9:13), the Sabbaths are the Lord’s.[43] Therefore, by a comparison to the Noahic sign and its function, we discover that the covenant sign is not for humanity alone, but also for God.

In the case of the Noahic covenant, God remembers his promises when he sees the sign. The same is true here. Moreover, where the Lord took his rest on the seventh day in creation, so again in his covenant with Israel, God establishes the Sabbath as his day of rest and refreshment (Exod. 31:17). In ways that we will consider below, the Lord’s Sabbaths are days when he is “refreshed” by his people’s praise. This is true in events like the Passover and the Day of Atonement, but it is also true of the weekly Sabbath, as Exodus 31:17 specifies.

To clarify my point, Exodus 31:13 is directed to the people of Israel. “You are to speak to the people of Israel and say, ‘Above all you shall keep my Sabbaths.” And so, the Lord’s possession of the Sabbaths does not deny the obedience of the people. Instead, it calls the people to take up the priestly task to renew their covenant. The priestly nature of this task comes from the word “keep” (šmr), which was discussed in point 5 above. And the covenant renewal comes from the way that Exodus 31:13 and 16 speak of the generations keeping “covenant forever.” Then, building on these two elements, the liturgical purpose of the Sabbath is found in the way that renewing covenant is a liturgical act. [44]

Second, the sign of the covenant is not the weekly Sabbath, but the entire system of Sabbaths.

Often overlooked, the plural “Sabbaths” indicates something more than the weekly Sabbath.[45] When compared to the rest of the Old Testament, the plural is used more than two dozen times.[46] Most instructively, the plural form of Sabbaths is regularly used in conjunction with the other festivals (see e.g., 1 Chr. 23:31; 2 Chr. 2:4; 8:13; 31:3; Neh. 10:33; Ezek. 45:17), thus indicating the way in which Sabbaths should be understood as a part of a larger unit. As Philip S. Ross notes, the prophets “illustrate that ‘sabbath’ [or Sabbaths] does not always point strictly to the fourth commandment.”[47]

Even closer to text, Exodus 23:10–19, the last place Moses mentions the word, gives us a wider scope for the Sabbath, helping us see how Sabbath in the singular becomes Sabbaths. “Sabbaths” is not just the repetition of weekly Sabbaths, as in Isaiah 66:23 (“from Sabbath to Sabbath”), but is the whole system of Sabbath-keeping that is outlined in multiple places (Exod. 23, Lev. 23, Num. 28–29).

Thus, we should see the whole Sabbath system as the sign whereby God remembers his people and the world recognizes the presence of God with Israel.[48] If this is the case, then it is undeniable that the covenantal sign is intrinsically liturgical. For in all the places where the Sabbaths are listed, they are directing the worship of Israel. Thus, the sign of the covenant is not found in the people resting in their tents remembering God; it is found in the people of Israel turning their attention from ordinary work to worshiping God on all the days marked out for holy convocations.

Third, worshiping God is what signifies Israel as a kingdom of priests and holy nation.

Going further into the nature of the covenantal sign, it should be remembered that the Fourth Commandment calls the whole nation to turn aside from their ordinary work and to attend to the Lord. In the wilderness, this looked like standing at the tent and beholding the glory cloud (Exod. 16). In the land, this looked like weekly remembrance of the Lord, aided by Levites (Deut. 14:22–16:17). And later still, as in the Gospels, this would look like Jews gathering in synagogues to hear the Law and the Prophets (Luke 4:16–30; Acts 13:14–15). Despite those changes, the priestly nature of the day remained. And as Exodus 31:13 declares, the Sabbaths were given so that God would “sanctify” his people. Indeed, to remain a holy nation, the people had to keep Sabbath. But to be sanctified meant more than resting; it meant approaching the place where God rested in order to worship.

As G. K. Beale teaches from Psalm 115, you become like what you worship.[49] And on the Sabbath, the way that the people would be sanctified was not by rest and remembrance alone. Rather, they were to remember by worshipping. Sanctification comes by means of worship. And thus Israel’s Sabbath was to “be set apart for the worship of God,” as the London Baptist Confession of Faith (22:7) puts it. Even more, unless this day is understood liturgically, it makes little sense why failure to keep it is a capital offense.

Fourth, worshiping God falsely is what makes breaking the Sabbath so offensive.

Exodus 31 introduces a shocking punishment for breaking the Sabbath: death. Twice in verses 14–15, the Lord commands death for Sabbath-breaking.

You shall keep the Sabbath, because it is holy for you. Everyone who profanes it shall be put to death. Whoever does any work on it, that soul shall be cut off from among his people. 15 Six days shall work be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of solemn rest, holy to the LORD. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day shall be put to death.

According the Law of Moses, capital punishment is justified in cases where the Ten Commandments are violated.[50] But one has to ask, why was the man who picked up sticks on the Sabbath put to death (see Num. 15:32–36)? One could answer: Because Exodus 31:14–15 says so. But it says so for a very specific reason. The man who was picking up sticks was presumably doing so to stoke the fire at his house, which was a rejection of the tabernacle’s altar..

In yet another amplification to the Fourth Commandment, Moses writes, “Six days work shall be done, but on the seventh day you shall have a Sabbath of solemn rest, holy to the LORD. Whoever does any work on it shall be put to death. You shall kindle no fire in all your dwelling places on the Sabbath day” (Exod. 35:2–3). This is the text that explains the violation of Numbers 15. When the man left his tent to pick up sticks, he was working to kindle a fire at his house. And why was this worthy of death? The answer can only make sense in the context of worship.

While kindling a fire is clearly a violation of God’s Word, the logic of putting to death a fire-starter is tied to false worship. Just as false prophets deserved death because that prophet sought to lead the people astray (Deut. 13:1–18), so too the one who refused to worship God on the Sabbath. Similarly, Deuteronomy 17:2–5 says that if there is “a man or woman who does what is evil in the sight of the LORD your God, in transgressing his covenant, 3 and has gone and served other gods and worshiped them, or the sun or the moon or any of the host of heaven, which I have forbidden, . . . then you shall bring out to your gates that man or woman who has done this evil thing, and you shall stone that man or woman to death with stones.”

While Deuteronomy 17 points to events that will come in the land, the response of the congregation in Numbers 15:36 is the same. They found a man doing evil, breaking covenant, and worshiping God falsely by not worshiping him at all. Thus, under the stipulations of the Mosaic covenant, the capital punishment was justified.[51] Still, the gravity of the situation could only be assessed as deadly because of the way that the Sabbath was given for worship. Thus, the violation was something akin to this: instead of attending to the heavenly fire that burned on the tabernacle’s altar (cf. Lev. 9:22–24), this rebel son of sought to build his own fire and died like Nadab and Abihu who offered unauthorized fire (Lev. 10:1).[52]

Finally, Ezekiel 20 confirms the deadly consequences of breaking the Sabbath with false worship. Reflecting on the way that Israel broke the Sabbaths that God gave to them (Ezek. 20:12–13), the prophet states that God let Israel die in the wilderness “because they rejected my rules and did not walk in my statutes, and profaned my Sabbaths; for their heart went after their idols” (Ezek. 20:16).

Notice again the connection between Sabbath breaking and false worship. God put the first generation of Israel to death because “their heart went after their idols.” Notably, after the Sabbath-breaker was put to death, Numbers 15:39 also identifies the heart of Israel as a problem. Responding to that problem, God told Israel to affix blue tassels to their garments in order to remind them to keep all of his commandments (Num. 15:40). These blue tassels seem to mimic the priests apparel (Exod. 28), which suggests that the people of Israel needed to remember their priestly identity and their holy calling (Exod. 19:5–6).

All in all, there are lots of pieces to this puzzle, and some that are stronger than others, but together they all make on point: the Sabbath is for worship. Chosen from all the nations, God gave Israel his Sabbaths to be a sign of his covenant with them. And for this reason, the Sabbath was intrinsically liturgical.

Fifth, worshiping God as he has commanded is what “refreshes” God.

Bringing this essay to a close, I land on perhaps the most important argument for the Sabbath being liturgical—that God is refreshed when his people keep Sabbath and worship him. Drawing on the parallel idea that God is pleased when he smells the “pleasing aroma” of the sacrifice, seen in places like Genesis 8:21, Exodus 29:18, 29, 41, and throughout Leviticus, the best way to understand the Lord’s refreshment is in terms of rightly ordered worship.

Here’s how it reads In Exodus 31:17. Speaking of the Sabbaths, Moses says “It is a sign forever between me and the people of Israel that in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day he rested and was refreshed.’” Putting aside the argument that “a sign forever” is an argument for the perpetual nature of the Sabbath, we need to understand why God is “refreshed” by the Sabbath.[53]

In context, Moses reflects on the creation week when the LORD rested and was refreshed. Because nothing was said about refreshment in Genesis 2:1–3, Moses is providing a theological interpretation of that event and one that employs as high degree of anthropomorphism. That is to say, that just as God the Almighty Maker was not exhausted by creation (contra King David in 2 Samuel 16:14), neither was the blessed Lord deficient of omnipotent joy or spiritual vitality. Nevertheless, when he rested in Genesis 2:1–3, he did so as a king ready to enjoy the work that he had finished.

Reflecting on that day, Moses speaks of the Lord’s refreshment. And remarkably, the verb used here (nps) has the sense of “breathe” or “taking a breath.” The nominal form of this word is often translated as “soul/life” or “living being,”[54] as in the formation of Adam in Genesis 2:7. Accordingly, when this term is applied to the Lord, there is no sense of recovering breath or life, but by comparison to its human applications, we might see how the spirit of the Lord, while remaining unchanged by his creation, is wonderfully enlivened by the communion of his faithful saints who turn their attention to him in worship.

For our purposes, space does not permit a full investigation of the term “refreshed,” and language fails to express what is happening to God when his people rightly worship him. But clearly, this refreshment is more than just a return to homeostasis. Far better is the image of God enthroned on the praises of his people (Ps. 22:3), receiving the worship that he deserves. And thus, the liturgical purpose of the Sabbath reappears.

In the end, if my reading of Exodus 20:8–11 and its attendant passages is correct, then it cannot mean that the Sabbath was a day for rest divorced from worship. It is difficult to imagine how God could be refreshed apart from his redeemed saints worshiping in Spirit and Truth. In fact, this is the whole reason why God created mankind in his image, and it is why he has labored through the millennia to bring his people through his Son into his eternal rest (see Heb. 4:8–11).

For this reason, and for many others outlined above, I conclude again that the Fourth Commandment has a liturgical purpose. And any attempt to understand or apply the Sabbath that ignores or denies this purpose not only misreads the Bible, but it also robs God of the praise he deserves and delights to receive.

A Pastoral Argument for Gathered Worship

Returning to the opening question (Is mental health ever a legitimate excuse to not assemble regularly?), the answer has to be a resolute, “NO.” Not because pastors are hard-hearted legalists who force ailing members to go to church against their wills, but because when God writes his law on the heart of his new covenant saints, he gives them the Spirit to empower their worship and their gathering.

Again, Hebrews 10:25 is clear that saints are not to forsake the assembly of the church. But that command is not one that hangs in mid-air. Instead, it is a part of a long arc that develops across the biblical canon and leads to this truth: In Christ, God has given his people rest, and in so doing, he also raises them to life so that they can obey his command to worship him. Such commandments to worship God can be found in Scripture independent of the Sabbath. But what we cannot find is a comprehensive reading of the Fourth Commandment that is ever divorced from worship.

Unfortunately, Beau Landers’ new book makes such a case. And thus, for all the helpful ways that it presents the Sabbath, it fails at the most basic level. It misses countless ways that Moses connects the Sabbath to the worship of God. And thus, this essay has attempted to make clear that there is a liturgical purpose in the Fourth Commandment. And from that purpose, it sets us on a different trajectory in the rest of the Bible, a trajectory that ultimately leads to calling saints—especially weak saints—to gather with the Lord and his people on the Lord’s Day.

In the end, this essay has not offered a whole Bible theology for the Sabbath. Perhaps, if the Lord allows, I might get to do that work on one another day. But for this day, as I attempt to work on the Sabbath and what it means for weary saints, let us not disregard the command to worship, to gather, and to do so on the day that the Lord has made for his worship. For truly, the Sabbath had a liturgical purpose when Moses received the Ten Words on Sinai. And it helps no one—then or now—to deny that glorious truth.

  1. Beau M. Landers, Christ Will Give You Rest, New Studies in Biblical Theology (Apollos, 2026), 271. This quotation comes from the UK edition of his book. The American edition comes out later this year. ↑

  2. For instance, see Ardel Caneday’s three-part essay on the Sabbath: “Remember the Sabbath: Israel’s Covenant Sign Fulfilled in Christ, Part 1,” Christ Over All, September 14, 2026; Caneday, “Remember the Sabbath: Israel’s Covenant Sign Fulfilled in Christ, Part 2,” Christ Over All, September 15, 2026; Caneday, “Remember the Sabbath: Israel’s Covenant Sign Fulfilled in Christ, Part 3,” Christ Over All, September 16, 2026. ↑

  3. I am here using the term “Reformed Baptist” to refer broadly to Baptists who are Reformed, rather than a specific denomination or network. ↑

  4. The full statement reads: “As it is the law of nature, that in general a proportion of time, by God’s appointment, be set apart for the worship of God, so by his Word, in a positive moral, and perpetual commandment, binding all men, in all ages, he has 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 Lord’s 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.” (22:7). ↑

  5. ​​In his book, Obey the Sabbath: Rest in Christ (Canon Sense, 2020), 11, A. Blake White, writes, “There is not an exegetical shred of evidence for transferring the Sabbath to the first day of the week. This comes from human tradition, not the exegesis of texts.” And again, later, “Christians are not bound to the Sabbath command. . . . The seventh day at creation, and the later Sabbath command pointed forward to something greater. To the One who alone brings true rest. Here and now, we can rest from our works by trusting in the Messiah. We can have a taste of the life to come in the present evil age. In the New Covenant, to obey the Sabbath is to trust King Jesus. Rest in Him.” ↑

  6. Thomas R. Schreiner wrote the chapter, “Goodbye and Hello: The Sabbath Command for New Covenant Believers,” in Progressive Covenantalism: Charting a Course between Dispensational and Covenantal Theologies (Nashville: B&H Academic), 159–88, wherein he takes a position very similar to Blake White. ↑

  7. Those who want to pit 1689 Federalism over against Progressive Covenantalism (PC) should recall Christ Over All broadly affirms the London Baptist Confession of Faith. Equally, one’s exact position on the Sabbath does not determine the essence of PC. The Sabbath is one of many “typological patterns that all reach their fulfillment in Christ and the new covenant” (as our foundational document frames it). Thus, while the Sabbath is a test case for how we put the Bible together, it should not be the all-determining doctrine that sets the bounds of PC. Rather, as both this essay will show (and as Ardel Caneday’s three-part essay has shown), there is a tightly-related set of theological hermeneutics that PC affirms, which may result in a wider set of Sabbath convictions or applications—e.g., some might encourage Blue Laws, others might not. ↑

  8. Outlining his own view, Landers lumps together theologians who could be distinguished as affirming either New Covenant Theology (Zaspel), Progressive Covenantalism (Schreiner, Wellum), or one of these systems precursors (Carson, Blomberg, Moo). Landers, Christ Will Give You Rest, 54. ↑

  9. Landers, Christ Will Give You Rest, xxiii, names the five positions as “(1) the permanent sabbath view, (2) the Christian sabbath view, (3) the mediating sabbath view, (4) the transformed sabbath view, and (5) the discontinued sabbath view.” He outlines all of these positions in chapter 2. Landers, Christ Will Give You Rest, 19–55. ↑

  10. Landers, Christ Will Give You Rest, 40. ↑

  11. Landers, Christ Will Give You Rest, 266–72. ↑

  12. Landers, Christ Will Give You Rest, 271. ↑

  13. Landers, Christ Will Give You Rest, 315. With respect to this appeal to culture, one needs to ask, “And where did the culture of Sunday worship arise? And could Landers biblical vision for the Sabbath create the same kind of culture?” In my estimation, his view of the Sabbath would only rob cultures of establishing Sunday as for Christian worship. If there is any cultural place for Sunday in the West, it can largely be attributed to the Sabbatarian views of the Puritans and those Americans who followed them. Cf. Miles V. Smith, Religion and Republic: Christian America for the Founding to the Civil War (Davenant, 2024), 119–45. ↑

  14. Landers, Christ Will Give You Rest, 315. ↑

  15. The language textual, epochal, and canonical horizons goes back to Richard Lints, The Fabric of Theology: A Prolegomenon to Evangelical Theology (Eerdmans, 1993), 293–310. I have defined my own use of the terms in another essay, “The Three Most Important Words I Learned in Seminary: ‘Textual, Epochal, Canonical,’” 9Marks, March 31, 2020. ↑

  16. Landers, Christ Will Give You Rest, 83–84. ↑

  17. Landers, Christ Will Give You Rest, 87–88. ↑

  18. Pursuant of “organization and clarity,” Landers focuses on the Sabbath’s “threefold purpose,” which he enumerates as “(1) theological: as a proclamation that God is both Creator and Deliverer; (2) covenantal: as a sign of the Mosaic covenant; and (3) eschatological: as a hope for something greater” (Landers, Christ Will Give You Rest, 82–83) Tackling a complex subject like the Sabbath with this thematic approach is fine. But it leaves a hole. ↑

  19. Stressing the individual, he writes, “Every Israelite was commanded ‘to keep/observe’ (śmr) the weekly sabbath (Exod. 31:13–14, 16; Deut. 5:12).” Landers, Christ Will Give You Rest, 93. ↑

  20. Landers, Christ Will Give You Rest, 94–96. ↑

  21. Landers, Christ Will Give You Rest, 179. ↑

  22. Landers, Christ Will Give You Rest, 200. ↑

  23. Landers, Christ Will Give You Rest, 269. ↑

  24. In addition to worship, serving the Lord is also language related to working in the tabernacle (Num. 3:7,8; 4:23; 18:7), ↑

  25. Meredith G. Kline, The Structure of Biblical Authority (Wipf and Stock, 1997), 113–30. ↑

  26. See Exod. 31:18; cf. 24:12; 32:15, 16; Deut. 4:13; 5:22; 9:10, 11. ↑

  27. There are four negations in the first three commandments because negations #2 and #3 are traditionally lumped together as one command (Exod. 20:4–6). ↑

  28. Joshua Philpot, “The Ten Commandments and the Literary Structure of Deuteronomy,” Christ Over All, September 2, 2026. ↑

  29. From my reading, I would put the instructions about tithes (Deut. 14:22–29) in the next section (Deut. 15:1–16:17), which is clearly amplifying teaching on the Sabbath. More on that point in a moment. ↑

  30. At this point, I am not adjudicating whether this promise to remain in the land continues today. Instead, I am making the point that the Fifth Commandment, in its original context, is closely connected to worship. ↑

  31. The fifth commandment is “the only commandment with a promise” (Eph. 6:2–3), yet even it does not speak directly of God’s blessing. ↑

  32. For more on the role the priests play in offering sacrifices on the Sabbath, see Number 8 below. ↑

  33. Landers, Christ Will Give You Rest, 96. ↑

  34. David Schrock, “How a Kingdom of Priests Became a Kingdom with Priests and Levites: A Filial-Corporate Understanding of the Royal Priesthood in Exodus 19:6,” SBJT 23, no. 1 (2019): 23–56. ↑

  35. G. K. Beale, “Adam as the First Priest in Eden as the Garden Temple,” SBJT 22, no. 2 (2018): 10–11. ↑

  36. Leviticus 23:7, 8, 21, 25, 35, 36; Numbers 28:18, 25, 26; 29:1, 12, 35. ↑

  37. John A. Davies, A Royal Priesthood: Literary and Intertextual Perspectives on an Image of Israel in Exodus 19:5–6 (Continuum, 2004), 36–37. ↑

  38. Philpot, “Ten Words and the.” He identifies Deuteronomy 15–16 as the two chapters that develop the Fourth Commandment. Scott Redd, “Deuteronomy,” in A Biblical-Theological Introduction to the Old Testament, ed. Miles Van Pelt (Crossway, 2016), 141 makes the same case, but he includes the instructions about tithing (14:22–29). I follow Redd’s outline. ↑

  39. T. J. Betts, Ezekiel the Priest: A Custodian of Tôrâ (Peter Lang, 2005), 23–24. ↑

  40. Importantly, this is how Jesus keeps the Sabbath. On the Sabbath, he heals the sick and gives rest to others (see e.g., Matt. 12:1–8, 9–14; Mark 1:21–28, 29–31; Luke 13:10–17; John 5:1–18). ↑

  41. Landers, Christ Will Give You Rest, 85–106. ↑

  42. Landers, Christ Will Give You Rest, 89. I have changed the formatting of his three bullet points. ↑

  43. The Lord’s possession of the Sabbaths repeats throughout the Old Testament (Lev. 19:13, 30; 26:2; Isa. 56:4; Ezek. 20:12, 13, 16, 20, 21, 24; 22:8, 26; 23:38; 44:24). ↑

  44. Jeffery J. Meyers, The Lord’s Service: The Grace of Covenant Renewal Worship (Canon Press, 2003). ↑

  45. Technically, one would be correct to say that the weekly Sabbath signified the Mosaic covenant. But this is only true in relationship to the rest of the Sabbatical system. ↑

  46. Sometimes referring to the Lord’s Sabbaths, sometimes the land’s, twenty-seven is the number of times “Sabbaths” is used (Lev. 19:3, 30; 23:38; 26:2; 26:34 [2x], 35, 43; 1 Chr. 23:31; 2 Chr. 2:4; 8:13; 31:3; 36:2; Num. 10:33; Ezek. 20:12, 13, 16, 20–21, 24; 22:8, 26; 23:38; 44:24; 45:17; 46:3; Hos. 2:11). ↑

  47.  Philip S. Ross, From the Finger of God: The Biblical and Theological Basis for the Threefold Division of the Law (Christian Focus, 2010), 277. ↑

  48. This is a point on which I agree with Beau Landers, Christ Will Give You Rest, 94–96. The difference is that he sees the personal, individual Sabbath-keeping as a sign to the nations. I don’t. It is the public, visible worship of God that signifies the presence of God in the midst of Israel. ↑

  49. G. K. Beale, We Become What We Worship: A Biblical Theology of Idolatry (IVP Academic, 2008). ↑

  50. Peter Leithart, “The Death Penalty in the Mosaic Law,” lists all the instances where capital punishment is recommended, and every commandment is listed except the Second and the Tenth. ↑

  51. If one thinks this punishment overly severe or relegated to the old covenant, compare the story of Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5:1–11, who lied to the Holy Spirit and perished as a result. ↑

  52. The consequence of breaking the Sabbath in Numbers 15 is greater than Exodus 16 because the people of Israel (1) had received the Ten Commandments (Exod. 20:1–17), (2) had promised full obedience (Exod. 24:1–8), (3) had seen the tabernacle of the Lord built in their midst, and most importantly (4) had seen the fire of heaven ignite the altar (Lev. 9:24). Notably, the command not to kindle a fire on the Sabbath begins the section of the tabernacles construction (Exod. 35:1–3). ↑

  53. On this point and his reading of the word “forever” (ôlām), I agree with Landers, Christ Will Give You Rest, 90. ↑

  54. Ernst Jenni and Claus Westermann, Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament (Hendrickson, 1997), 745. ↑

Read Full Article →
Content Disclaimer & Linking Policy →