Make a Donation

Appendix I

Ammending God's Law

There are those who believe the scriptures can be somewhat misleading with respect to God’s instructions concerning proper Sabbath observance. These “believers” argue that God’s law must be placed in a proper context. Although this is true, it brings with it considerable risk. For example: many professing Christians manipulate the scriptures in an attempt to accommodate pre-conceived ideas about what God is saying in His word. As a result, man has concocted an endless array of beliefs. Sadly, this practice has even raised its ugly head within God’s Church.

Nowhere is this fact more evident than in the church’s understanding of the fourth commandment – specifically the issue of going to restaurants on the Sabbath. Although the Bible clearly prohibits this practice, many of God’s people, including their leaders, believe it is permissible. They justify this view by employing semantical arguments when applying God’s word in their lives. In essence, they re-write His law to accommodate their actions.

The following are seven examples of how the original command is modified in the minds of many in the church today. These modifications expand the commandment to accommodate the belief that God approves of going to restaurants on His Sabbath. And although those who engage in this practice may not literally desire to change the wording of the command, they most definitely alter its meaning by their behavior.

These modifications are intended to illustrate how radical certain beliefs are. This is done by expressing how they would look if God Himself actually stated them. As you read each example ask yourself if the amended command is really what God intended when He gave the fourth commandment.

Example I:

A Matter of Personal Labor

Original Command:

“Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shall you labor and do all your work: but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God: in it you shall not do any work...” (Ex. 20:8-10)

Amended Command:

“Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shall you labor and do all your work: but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God: in it you shall not do any work. However, you may compel others to labor on your behalf provided they are not under your direct authority or responsibility.”

Surprisingly, there are many in God’s church today who believe the fourth commandment is limited in scope. In other words, although it prohibits His people from engaging in labor, it does not prohibit them from orchestrating the labor of others for their benefit. As a result of this thinking, many contend that when God gave His law regarding the Sabbath, He intentionally made provisions for His people to be the beneficiary of the labor of others. Therefore, they contend that going to a restaurant on the Sabbath is acceptable with God because the labor being solicited is being performed by those outside the camp of His people.

Although many may write the amended command differently with respect to style, those who go to restaurants on the Sabbath concur with the substance of this modified rendering of God’s law. The question is: do you? Ask yourself: do these words really sound like they express the wisdom of the Holy One of Israel? Was it God’s intent to simply shield His people from profaning the day He set apart? Or was He expressing a greater eternal truth about His Kingdom?

Today, all too many in God’s church advance an endless stream of technical arguments in an attempt to circumvent God’s law. But in the final analysis, God’s word is clear. When He told His people they were not to work on the Sabbath, He was declaring that labor profanes the day He made HOLY! Even God Himself ceased from His labor on this day. Does anyone sincerely believe He would solicit the labor of someone else?

The point God was making when He uttered the fourth commandment was that Israel was not to be a party to profane work in any way, shape, or form on this day unless it specifically related to a Levitical duty (Mt. 12:1-5). Going to a restaurant on the Sabbath is not such a duty.

Example II:

A Matter of Children

Original Command:

Amended Command:

“Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shall you labor and do all your work: but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God: in it you shall not do any work, you nor your son nor your daughter. However, you may compel others such as aunts, uncles, cousins, grandparents, nephews and nieces, as well as that guy you refer to as ‘Uncle Bob,’ to labor on your behalf.”

This amended command is intended to illustrate where semantical arguments can lead. Those who try to affix a very narrow interpretation of God’s commandments do so in order to broaden the path they wish to take. In other words, many conclude: “the Bible only mentions ‘my servants’, ‘my family,’ and ‘my livestock.’ It doesn’t mention those that belong to someone else. Therefore, I can do anything I wish with that which is not mine.”

At this point it is important to understand that when God gave His Great Moral Code, it was to provide the Israelites with His perfect wisdom as well as His desire for all mankind. One only has to consider what the world will look like when Jesus Christ returns to understand this truth. At that time, all will honor His law the way He intends. Where do you think dining out on the Sabbath will fit in that Kingdom?

The point is that God never intended for His people to look for loopholes in His commandments. Ultimately, when He dispenses His judgment, we will understand that there are no loopholes.

Example III:

The Treatment of Servants

Original Command:

Amended Command:

Perhaps the most popular argument advanced by people attempting to justify going to restaurants on the Sabbath is that those working in the restaurant are not their servant – and the command only refers to “your servant.” Therefore, the amended command must be in keeping with God’s intent.

However, this thinking fails to understand God’s purpose for commanding the Israelites to free their servants from labor on the Sabbath. That purpose was powerfully conveyed by God when He gave the original command. The Great Law Giver told the Israelites, and He tells His people today, “You were once a slave in the land of Egypt” (Dt. 5:15).

The question God’s people today should ask themselves is: Would God want me to go back into spiritual Egypt and avail myself of the same bondage I was once in? The answer should be obvious.

Example IV:

The Treatment of Animals

Original Command:

Amended Command:

“Keep the Sabbath day to sanctify it, as the Lord your God has commanded you. Six days you shall labor, and do all your work: but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God: in it you shall not do any work, you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your manservant, nor your maidservant, nor your ox, nor your ass, nor any of your cattle However, you may compel other beasts of burden such as camels, elephants, etc. to labor on your behalf provided they are not treated with cruelty. Furthermore, if you must use an ox or an ass, you may do so provided it does not belong to you. Therefore, you may procure it from an unbeliever in the same way you may procure the services of a manservant or maidservant.”

It is doubtful that any true child of God would advance the argument that certain animals could be compelled to labor on the Sabbath while other animals are exempt from labor. However, for those who believe it is appropriate to go to restaurants on the Sabbath, this amended command must ring true. After all, why would God extend more mercy to an animal than He would to a person created in His own image?

Example V:

The Treatment of Strangers

Original Command:

Amended Command:

“Keep the Sabbath day to sanctify it, as the Lord your God has commanded you. Six days you shall labor, and do all your work: but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God: in it you shall not do any work, you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your manservant, nor your maidservant, nor your ox, nor you ass, nor any of your cattle, nor the stranger that is within your gates. However, you may compel the stranger that is outside your gate to labor on your behalf, provided he or she is not forced to labor against his or her will.”

Those who dine out on God’s Sabbath have argued that although the server at a restaurant is an unbeliever (“stranger”), God permits His people to avail themselves of his or her labor because the “stranger” in this case is not under the believer’s authority. In other words, the “stranger” is not “within the gates” of the believer. But is this really true? Does the believer possess no authority over the restaurant employee? This question can be answered with the following illustration: Imagine you are at a restaurant and the service is horrible. The meals are prepared incorrectly and the server in totally unresponsive to you and your guests. When you politely informed him of your concern over the level of service, he responds, “You can’t talk to me like that! I don’t work for you!” Would you honestly agree with his assessment?

The belief that restaurant employees are not under your authority is simply not true. But even if it was, does it make any difference to God? When it comes to the treatment of a “stranger” or brother on the Sabbath, God’s people are not to involve themselves in labor, directly or otherwise.

Perhaps the most important facet of God’s command with respect to the treatment of “strangers” is that God’s people were once “strangers” themselves. However, He delivered them out of the bondage of ignorance and sin into the liberty of His truth. It is a HUGE mistake to think that God would somehow permit His people to return to a world they were delivered from simply to benefit from its sin.

Statement VI:

Buying and Selling

Original Command:

“And if the people of the land bring ware or any victuals on the Sabbath day to sell, that we should not buy it of them on the Sabbath, or on the holy day...” (Neh. 10:31)

Amended Command:

“And if the people of the land bring ware or any victuals on the Sabbath day to sell, that we should not buy it of them on the Sabbath, or on the holy day. In other words, you are not to spend the entire day purchasing food or other necessities. However, you may spend abbreviated portions of the Sabbath to purchase provisions for you or your family as long as you remember to attend services and be with My people.”

Some leaders in God’s Church today contend that Nehemiah’s indictment of buying and selling on the Sabbath was limited to the scope of purchases being made. According to their reasoning, the Jews in Jerusalem were going into the open market for the entire day and purchasing provisions for their homes. These provisions would last for several days and even longer in many cases. This would be tantamount to buying several hundred dollars worth of groceries today as well as performing other errands. As a result, the entire day was spent in activities totally unrelated to the Sabbath. The assumption here is that it is acceptable with God if only an hour or two are spent in activities totally unrelated to the Sabbath.

These leaders argue that Nehemiah would never have addressed this issue if God’s people invested a more abbreviated period of time doing family errands or some other activity. Furthermore, they contend that sharing a meal with brethren at a restaurant does not distract God’s people from the Sabbath, it actually keeps them more connected to this day.

However, this reasoning represents a massive leap in logic. Nowhere does Nehemiah mention the length of this activity (buying and selling) as an issue, but rather the activity itself. Notice that Nehemiah was not attempting to restrict this practice, he was attempting to eliminate it altogether. It is true that some of God’s people may have spent the entire day purchasing goods and services, but that ignores a bigger question: why were they there at all? Nehemiah’s remedy was designed to address the latter.

The big question God’s people should ask themselves is this: Why would God allow His people to procure ANY food on His Sabbath when He actually prohibited the children of Israel from doing such a thing when they wandered in the Sinai desert (Ex. 16:16-25)?

Appendix II
"The Devil's Diner"

Return to Directory

Ammending God's Law

RELATED LINKS