Baptist Catechism 66 & 67

Q. 66. What is forbidden in the fourth commandment?

A. The fourth commandment forbids the omission or careless performance of the duties required, and the profaning the day by idleness, or doing that which is in itself sinful, or by unnecessary thoughts, words, or works, about worldly employments or recreations. (Ezekiel 22:26; 23:38; Jer. 17:21; Neh. 13:15,17; Acts 20:7)

Q. 67. What are the reasons annexed to the fourth commandment?

A. The reasons annexed to the fourth commandment are, God’s allowing us six days of the week for our own lawful employments, His challenging a special propriety in a seventh, His own example and His blessing the Sabbath day. (Exodus 34:21; 31:16,17; Gen. 2:2,3)

Scripture Reading: Acts 20:7-12

“On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul talked with them, intending to depart on the next day, and he prolonged his speech until midnight. There were many lamps in the upper room where we were gathered. And a young man named Eutychus, sitting at the window, sank into a deep sleep as Paul talked still longer. And being overcome by sleep, he fell down from the third story and was taken up dead. But Paul went down and bent over him, and taking him in his arms, said, ‘Do not be alarmed, for his life is in him.’ And when Paul had gone up and had broken bread and eaten, he conversed with them a long while, until daybreak, and so departed. And they took the youth away alive, and were not a little comforted.” (Acts 20:7–12, ESV)

*****

Please excuse any typos and misspellings within this manuscript. It has been published online for the benefit of the saints of Emmaus Reformed Baptist Church but without the benefit of proofreading.

*****

Introduction

As we consider the moral law of God as summarized in the Ten Commandments, there are two errors that must be avoided. The first error is legalism. The second error is antinomianism. Both of these errors are very serious and must be avoided.

What is legalism? Well, it takes different forms. 

One, it is the false belief that sinful men and women can be made right with God through obedience to the law of God. The Scriptures are clear that this is impossible for the simple reason that all mere men are lawbreakers. Apart from Christ, we stand guilty before God. No amount of lawkeeping will fix that problem. We need a Redeemer. His name is Jesus Christ. He kept God’s law in our place. He died in our place, too, so that we might be forgiven and reconciled to the God the Father. 

There is a second form of legalism that must also be avoid, and it is the elevation of human traditions and opinions to the level of law, along with the imposition of those traditions and opinions on others. If I choose to fast every Thursday and to make that a law for myself—if I do it, not to earn God’s favor, but from the heart and out of gratitude for all that God has done for me in Christ Jesus—that is not legalism. But if I begin to preach and to bind the consciences of others, saying, you must fast every Thursday, or you must not eat meat during this time of the year, or you must observe these holidays, etc, that is legalism, for the word of God has not commanded such things. We must not treat human traditions or opinions as if they are the law of God.

A third form of legalism is really a subcategory of the second, and that is the false teaching that believers under the New Covenant are obliged to obey the civil and ceremonial laws that were given to Isarel under the Old Covenant. Granted, these laws are biblical in the sense that they are found in the Bible, but they are not binding on us now because we do not live under the Old Covenant of which they were a part. We live under the New Covenant, not the Old. Yes, the Hebrews living under the Old Covenant were obligated to circumcise their male children, offer sacrifices at the temple, and to observe many holy days and Sabbaths, throughout the year. They were not legalists when they keep these laws (provided that they weren’t trying to earn eternal life through the keeping of them instead of through faith in the promised Redeemer). No, they were right to obey these laws, for these laws were not the product of man, but were given by God to them. But if anyone comes to you today and says, you are obligated to keep the civil and ceremonial laws given to Israel—to be circumcised, to abstain from certain foods, or to observe Old Covenant festivals, new moons, and Sabbaths (see Colossians 2:16)—that person is a legalist. Though it is true that all of these laws were from God, it is also true that they are not for us, for we live under the New Covenant and not the Old. We have Christ as our High Priest, and not Aaron. The Scriptures are clear, “when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well” (Hebrews 7:12, ESV). New Covenant saints are not bound to observe Old Covenant laws.

Beware of legalism in all of its forms, brothers and sisters.

What then is antinomianism? Well, it is the false teaching that says, there is no law for the Christian. The prefix “anti” means “against”, and “nomos” means “law”. So then, antinomians teach, in one way or another, that there is no law for the Christian. As with legalism, antinomianism comes in different flavors. Some may teach that there is no objective law for the Christian, period. I suspect that most would say that there is a law, but it is the law of the Spirit, or the law of Christ. They then suppose that the law of the Spirit or of Christ is different in substance from the law written on stone at Sinai. Both views are erroneous, and they leave the Christian without an objective moral standard. If I were to guess, I would say antinomianism is a bigger problem in the church today (at least in our region) than legalism is. It must be avoided. 

If you wish to read a very helpful summary of what we believe concerning God’s law, I would encourage you to read chapter 19 of our confession of faith, The Second London Baptist Conefssion. In brief, we confess that God’s moral law was given first, not to Israel, but to Adam, having been written on his heart. The moral law of God is for all people living in all times and places, therefore. Furthermore, we confess that the same moral law written on Adam’s heart is contained within the Ten Commandments which were written on stone and given to Isarel through Moses at Sinai. In those days, many other civil and ceremonial laws were added to the Ten Commandments and given peculiarly to Isarel. The moral law, as contained within the Ten Commandments, is for all people living in all places and times. But the civil and ceremonial laws found in the Old Testament were binding on Old Covenant Isarel only.

I mention chapter 19 of our confession, because it helps guard against the errors of legalism and antinomianism. On the one hand, it protects us from leagalism when it states in paragraph 6 that “true believers [are] not under the law as a covenant of works, to be thereby justified or condemned…” It also protects us from leagalism when it clearly teaches that the civil and ceremonial laws given to Old Covenant Israel have been fulfilled and taken away. On the other hand, our confession protects against antinomianism when it says in paragraph 5 that “The moral law doth for ever bind all, as well justified persons as others, to the obedience thereof, and that not only in regard of the matter contained in it, but also in respect of the authority of God the Creator, who gave it; neither doth Christ in the Gospel any way dissolve, but much strengthen this obligation.” In paragraph 6, we confess that the moral law is it is “of great use to [believers] as well as to others”, and then a list of uses follows. I especially appreciate paragraph 7, which says, “Neither are the aforementioned uses of the law contrary to the grace of the Gospel, but do sweetly comply with it, the Spirit of Christ subduing and enabling the will of man to do that freely and cheerfully which the will of God, revealed in the law, requireth to be done.” 

*****

Baptist Catechism 66 & 67

You may be wondering what all of this has to do with Baptist Catechism questions 66 and 67. Well, I believe I have said enough about what the fourth commandment requires and forbids in the previous two sermons. Here I wanted to take a moment to counter the criticism that we will certainly face, even from other Christians living in our time and place, as we strive, by the grace of God and in the power of the Spirit, to honor the Lord’s Day Sabbath and to keep it holy. What will some charge us with? Answer: legalism.

But is it legalistic to say that the Christian ought to obey God’s moral law? Is it legalistic to say that the Christian ought to worship God alone in the way he has prescribed, honoring one day in seven as holy unto him until the end of the world? Certainly not. 

Some who are anti-Sabbatiarians will say, well, the practice of Sabbath keeping belonged to the ceremonial laws of Old Covenant Israel and has been done away with. You are guilty of legalism for teaching that the Sabbath Day is to be kept under the New Covenant. This is not true. As has been said in previous sermons, that Sabbath command was not given first to Israel through Moses, but to Adam. And when the Sabbath command was given to Isarel through Moses, it was given a special place at the heart of the Ten Commandments, wherein God’s universal and unchanging moral law is summarized. Will the anti-Sabitarians charge us with legalism when we say that God alone is to be worshiped, not with images, and with reverence for his name? Will they charge us with legalism when we say, You shall honor your father and mother, do not murder, commit adultery, steal, bear false witness, or covet? Are we guilty of legalism when we teach that Christians are to keep these laws, not to earn God’s favor, but from a heart renewed and empowered by the Holy Spirit out of gratitude for all that God has done for us in Christ? OI doubt it! Why then do so many professing Christians in our day charge us with legalism when we teach that the fourth of these ten Commandments is to be kept, too? I’m afraid that the antinomian error has had a devastating effect on the modern church.    

Some who are anti-Sabbatiarians will respond, saying, but the command to keep the Sabbath day holy is not restated in the New Testament, therefore we are not bound to keep it. 

First of all, this is simply not true. But let us assume for a moment that it was true. What if the fourth commandment were not restated in the New Testament? Would this mean that we are not bound to keep it? I think not. The question I would ask in reply is this: Who invented this rule that for something to be believed or obeyed by the New Covenant people of God, it must be restated in the New Testament? This is a false assumption. In fact, the New Testament is not written as a fresh start. It is written as a continuation and fulfillment of the Old. If something is to be done away with, you will need to demonstrate that it has been fulfilled or advanced somehow under the New Covenant. And as I said in the previous sermon, the thing of which the Sabbath is a sign, namely eternal rest in the presence of God, is not here yet in full. Christ has entered his rest. We rest in him in part. We will rest eternally when he returns to make all things new. Until then, the practice of Sabbath keeping remains for the people of God. This idea that something must be said in the New Testament for it to be believed or obeyed is not true.

But as I have said, this claim that the Sabbath is not taught in the New Testament is not true. Christ kept the Old Covenant Sabbath. He also stripped away all of the legalistic gunk that the religious leaders had piled on it so as to demonstrate what true Sabbath-keeping looked like. And after his resurrection, he met with his disciples on the first day of the week to break bread. The early church did the same, as recorded in Acts. And the writer of Hebrews clearly states that “there remains a [Sabbath-keeping] for the people of God…” (Hebrews 4:9).

Friends, assembling for Christian worship on the first day of the week is not merely the tradition of man. It is the law of God properly understood. It is the Christian, New Covenant, Lord’s Day Sabbath. I hope you understand, if it is only the tradition of man, then there is nothing at all binding us to worship on Sunday. In fact, nothing is binding us to weekly worship either.

Some who are anti-Sabbatiarians will respond, saying, then why has the day changed? Answer: The everabiding and unchanging moral principle is that a proportion of time is to be set apart for the worship of God. The pattern or rhythm God established at creation was one day in seven. This is the moral principle that remains. The particular itself is symbolic or ceremonial. In previous sermons, I described how the seventh day Sabbath fit with the terms of the Covenant of Works that God made with Adam in the garden (work will lead to rest). Also, the seventh day Sabbath was a reminder of the original creation, which has been ruined by sin. But the first day Sabbath fits with the terms of Covenant of Grace instituted by Christ  (rest in Christ leads to work). Also, the first day Sabbath is a reminder of the original creation and of the new creation which Christ earned through his life, death, and ressurection. The new creation was inaugurated when Christ rose. It will be consummated at his return. Then the weekly Sabbath will be fulfilled and swallowed up byu eternal rest in the presence of God.

*****

Conclusion

The fourth commandment remains, brothers and sisters. The day has changed. But the moral obligation to devote a proportion of time to the public and private worship of God remains. The pattern established at creation was one and seven. While this world remains, that weekly pattern will remain. From Adam to the resurrection of Christ, the holy day for rest and worship was Saturday. From the resurrection of Christ to the end of the world, the day is Sunday. And this is why you need to know that “the fourth commandment forbids the omission or careless performance of the duties required, and the profaning the day by idleness, or doing that which is in itself sinful, or by unnecessary thoughts, words, or works, about worldly employments or recreations.” 

I’ll conclude by asking you, have you kept this law perfectly? No, we have violated this law in thought, word, and deed. Thanks be to God for the forgiveness that is in Christ Jesus, and for the gift of the Spirit, who has regenerated us and freed us from bondage to sin so that we, by God’s grace, might obey God’s law willingly and from the heart, for our good and his glory.  

Pre-Introduction

Brothers and sisters, I realize this is Easter or Resurrection Sunday. Given that we will soon be considering Luke’s account of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ as we continue in our expositional study of his Gospel, I thought it best to stay the course and to consider Luke 20:1-18. Though this text is not about the resurrection of Christ, his death is foretold.  Furthermore, his resurrection is implied in the conclusion of this text, in the words, “The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone?” (Luke 20:17, ESV). I trust that you are capable of keeping the significance of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ in mind as we consider this passage, which tells of events that transpired no more than a week before Christ’s crucifixion.  

*****

Old Testament Reading: Isaiah 5:1-7

“Let me sing for my beloved my love song concerning his vineyard: My beloved had a vineyard on a very fertile hill. He dug it and cleared it of stones, and planted it with choice vines; he built a watchtower in the midst of it, and hewed out a wine vat in it; and he looked for it to yield grapes, but it yielded wild grapes. And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah, judge between me and my vineyard. What more was there to do for my vineyard, that I have not done in it? When I looked for it to yield grapes, why did it yield wild grapes? And now I will tell you what I will do to my vineyard. I will remove its hedge, and it shall be devoured; I will break down its wall, and it shall be trampled down. I will make it a waste; it shall not be pruned or hoed, and briers and thorns shall grow up; I will also command the clouds that they rain no rain upon it. For the vineyard of the LORD of hosts is the house of Israel, and the men of Judah are his pleasant planting; and he looked for justice, but behold, bloodshed; for righteousness, but behold, an outcry!” (Isaiah 5:1-7, ESV)

New Testament Reading: Luke 20:1-18

“One day, as Jesus was teaching the people in the temple and preaching the gospel, the chief priests and the scribes with the elders came up and said to him, ‘Tell us by what authority you do these things, or who it is that gave you this authority.’ He answered them, ‘I also will ask you a question. Now tell me, was the baptism of John from heaven or from man?’ And they discussed it with one another, saying, ‘If we say, ‘From heaven,’ he will say, ‘Why did you not believe him?’ But if we say, ‘From man,’ all the people will stone us to death, for they are convinced that John was a prophet.’ So they answered that they did not know where it came from. And Jesus said to them, ‘Neither will I tell you by what authority I do these things.’ And he began to tell the people this parable: ‘A man planted a vineyard and let it out to tenants and went into another country for a long while. When the time came, he sent a servant to the tenants, so that they would give him some of the fruit of the vineyard. But the tenants beat him and sent him away empty-handed. And he sent another servant. But they also beat and treated him shamefully, and sent him away empty-handed. And he sent yet a third. This one also they wounded and cast out. Then the owner of the vineyard said, ‘What shall I do? I will send my beloved son; perhaps they will respect him.’ But when the tenants saw him, they said to themselves, ‘This is the heir. Let us kill him, so that the inheritance may be ours.’ And they threw him out of the vineyard and killed him. What then will the owner of the vineyard do to them? He will come and destroy those tenants and give the vineyard to others.’ When they heard this, they said, ‘Surely not!’ But he looked directly at them and said, ‘What then is this that is written: ‘The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone’? Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces, and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him.’” (Luke 20:1-18, ESV)

*****

Please excuse any typos and misspellings within this manuscript. It has been published online for the benefit of the saints of Emmaus Reformed Baptist Church but without the benefit of proofreading.

Introduction

Do not forget that at this point in Luke’s narrative, Jesus has finally entered Jerusalem. It was back in Luke 9:51 that we read, “When the days drew near for [Jesus] to be taken up, he set his face to go to Jerusalem” (Luke 9:51, ESV), and now he has arrived. In Luke 19:28-40, we read of Jesus’s approach to Jerusalem. In Luke 19:41-48, we learned that when Jesus “drew near and saw the city, he wept over it” and announced its destruction was near. Jesus then went into the temple to cleanse it, driving out those who sold within. After this, Luke reports that “Jesus was teaching daily in the temple. Luke 19:47-48 says, “The chief priests and the scribes and the principal men of the people were seeking to destroy him, but they did not find anything they could do, for all the people were hanging on his words” (Luke 19:47-48, ESV). This is all background to the text we are considering today. Jesus is in the city of Jerusalem. Soon, he would be crucified and on the third day rise. But now he is found teaching in the temple with a great multitude of disciples around him.

Jesus’s Authority Was Questioned 

In Luke 20:1 we read, “One day, as Jesus was teaching the people in the temple and preaching the gospel, the chief priests and the scribes with the elders came up and said to him, “Tell us by what authority you do these things, or who it is that gave you this authority” (Luke 20:1–2, ESV).

Can you picture the scene? It’s truly an incredible one. Jesus the Messiah had arrived at his temple, and he was teaching the people. We should envision a great multitude of people surrounding Jesus. Many of them would have been regarded as outcasts in Israel. Perhaps some Gentiles had gathered around Jesus, too. At the close of the previous passage, Luke tells us that the people were “hanging on Jesus’s words.” This means they were paying very close attention to everything he said. 

[This, friends, is one of the defining characteristics of a disciple of Jesus. True disciples of Jesus hang on his words. True disciples of Jesus listen to his words and pay careful attention to them. This they will do when reading the Scriptures privately. And this they will do especially when the words of Christ are read and preached in his New Covenant temple, that is to say, the church. Friends, I must ask you, do you hang on the words of Jesus? Do you listen attentively to his words to receive them, submit to them, and obey them? True disciples of Jesus will hang on his words, whereas the non-believer and the false-believer will neglect and disregard them.]

Now, what was Jesus speaking about as he taught in the temple? Luke tells us he “was preaching the gospel”, that is to say, the good news regarding the arrival of the kingdom of God and of God’s salvation. Think of it. For hundreds of years, the temple had pointed forward to the arrival of the Messiah in a symbolic way. The Old Testament Scriptures, which testify concerning the coming Messiah, were read in that place. And the Psalms, which speak of Jesus, were sung there. Now, Jesus the Messiah stood in the temple, opened his mouth, and filled that sacred space with his voice as he announced the arrival of God’s salvation and kingdom. What a momentous event this was! 

Suddenly, Jesus was approached by a group of very powerful men. None other than the chief priests, the scribes, and the elders of Israel approached him. I imagine them entering the temple quickly and aggressively. I can picture the crowd that surrounded Jesus parting to make way for them. And what was their concern? They spoke to Jesus, saying, “Tell us by what authority you do these things, or who it is that gave you this authority”. In other words, they came to challenge the authority of Jesus by asking him, Who has given you the authority or right to do these things, that is to say, to cleanse the temple and to teach authoritatively in this place? 

Make no mistake about it, this was not a humble or honest question these men asked. It was a prideful question meant to challenge Jesus’s authority. They asked this question to oppose Jesus because they hated him. And they hated him because he threatened to undermine the authority they possessed within Old Covenant Israel.

This is the first observation concerning our text: The authority of Jesus was challenged or questioned by a group of very powerful men. They questioned his power and authority because he was a threat to theirs. 

Jesus Answered Their Question With A Question

Secondly, notice that Jesus answered their question with a question. 

Look at verse 3: “He answered them, ‘I also will ask you a question. Now tell me, was the baptism of John from heaven or from man?’” (Luke 20:3–4, ESV). In other words, who gave John the Baptist the authority to baptize? Was his authority from man, or was it from God? 

We should not think that Jesus was evading the question put to him by the principal men of Israel when he replied with a question of his own, for the question he asked them regarding their opinion of John the Baptist had everything to do with the question they asked him. If their opinion of John was that he was a mere man, then it would follow that Jesus’s authority was merely from man. But if their opinion of John was that he was a prophet sent by God, then it would follow that Jesus was from God too, for John testified that Jesus was the Messiah whom God had promised and provided.  

In verse 5, we read, “And [the leading men] discussed it with one another, saying, ‘If we say, ‘From heaven,’ he will say, ‘Why did you not believe him?’ But if we say, ‘From man,’ all the people will stone us to death, for they are convinced that John was a prophet” (Luke 20:5–6, ESV).

Consider how wise it was for Jesus to respond to the question of the chief priests, scribes, and elders with this question.  

First of all, by responding to their question with this question, he placed them on the horns of a dilemma. On the one hand, they were not willing to admit that John was a prophet sent by God, for to admit that would mean that they should have listened to what John said regarding Jesus, for John was the forerunner to Jesus! But on the other hand, they were not willing to say that John’s authority was from man, for the people believed John was a prophet sent from God, and the high priests, elders, and scribes were afraid of upsetting the multitude. So they pleaded ignorance. Look at verse 7: “So they answered that they did not know where it came from.” 

[As you can clearly see, these men did not care about the truth. They only cared about themselves and maintaining their power and authority. As you may know, many live life this way. They go along to get along in the world. The question that drives them is not, What is true or right, but What will benefit my cause and further my agenda. This way of life may benefit men for a time, but it will not benefit them in the end. Dear friends, I hope and pray that you do not live this way. I hope and pray that you are driven by the truth and a desire to see God and Christ glorified. I hope and pray that you are eager to believe what is true and do what is right, even if it costs you in the moment. 

When the chief priests, scribes, and elders came together to deliberate over Jesus’s question, they did not ask, What is right and true? Their concern was only to find a way to maintain the power and authority they had in the world. They took the path of least resistance. They replied like politicians. They attempted to remain neutral. But you cannot remain neutral with Jesus. Either you are for him or against him—there is no other option. This is what Jesus plainly taught. In Luke 11:23, we hear him say, “Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters.” 

So what is your answer, friend? What do you say about John the Baptist?  Was he a prophet from God, or was his authority derived from men? And what you think about John will impact what you think about Jesus, for John testified concerning Jesus that he was the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. What you think about these two men, John and Jesus, will demand a response from you. And what you believe about Jesus has eternal ramifications.]

Jesus was wise to respond to the question of the leading men of Israel with a question, for by doing so he set his opponents on the horns of a dilemma. Secondly, Jesus’s reply was wise because when he mentioned John the Baptist, it took the minds of his hearers back to the beginning days of his ministry, when John testified that Jesus was the Messiah, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. By mentioning John, it was a reminder of what happened when John baptized Jesus. As you know, “the Holy Spirit descended on [Jesus] in bodily form, like a dove; and a voice came from heaven, ‘You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased’” (Luke 3:22, ESV). By mentioning John, it caused his audience to recall John’s ministry, which marked the beginning of Jesus’s ministry, and all the things that had happened in the three years that followed. In other words, when the chief priests, scribes, and elders approached Jesus in the temple and said, “Tell us by what authority you do these things, or who it is that gave you this authority”, he could have simply said, it is God the Father who has given me this auithority, But by answering their question with this question, he gave those who heard him so much more by helping them to recal the glorious things that had transpired beginning with the ministry of John the Baptist, the great prophet of God and forerunner to the Messiah. As we remember the ministry of John the Baptist, Jesus’ baptism and the voice from heaven, and the ministry of Jesus that followed, the answer is very clear: Jesus’s authority was not derived from man but from God.   

Three, Jesus’ reply was wise because it showed that his authority was greater than theirs. The chief priests, scribes, and elders arrogantly entered the temple to question, judge, and condemn Jesus, but Jesus turned the tables on them. He showed that his authority was greater than theirs when he questioned them concerning their opinion of John.  

[Dear friends, there is a warning here to all who would be so arrogant and foolish as to attempt to stand in judgment over King Jesus. So humble and lowly was he at his first coming that many erred in this way. They imagined their authority was greater than his, so they stood over him to judge him. We see it here in the passage that is open before us today, and we will see it again in the passages that follow, which speak of Jesus’s arrest, trial, and crucifixion. Think of it! Sinful men stood in judgment over the Lord of glory, and they crucified him (see 1 Corinthians 2:8)! And arrogant men and women do the same thing with Jesus today. They stand above him to question him and to put him to the test. In pride, they dismiss him and refuse to submit to his Lordship.  But friends, on the last day, no man will question Jesus. Instead, King Jesus will question all men, and he will judge in rightousness. On that day, “at the name of Jesus every knee [will] bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (Philippians 2:10–11, ESV). Do not make the error that the chief priests, scribes, and elders of Israel made, assuming that their authority was greater than the authority of Jesus. No, recognize that Jesus is Lord Most High. He is the King of kings and Lord of lords. All authority in heaven and earth has been given to him. Humble yourself before him, therefore, and submit to him as King. Those who have not yet placed their faith in Christ must be exhorted to do this for the first time. Bow the knee to King Jesus and confess him as Lord, to have him as Savior. And those who have Christ as Lord must be encouraged to submit to the authority of King Jesus more and more each day, for God “gives more grace.” He “opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble. Submit yourselves therefore to God” through Christ the King (see James 4:6–7).

Jesus answered the question put to him by the chief priests, scribes, and elders with a question, and this was very wise. But that is not all he had to say. He also answered them with a parable.

Jesus Answered Their Question With A Parable

Look with me at verse 9: “And he began to tell the people this parable…” I take this to mean that he uttered this parable (an earthly story with a spiritual meaning) to all the people who had gathered around him in the temple, including the chief priests, scribes, and elders. The parable begins like this: “A man planted a vineyard and let [or leased] it out to tenants and went into another country for a long while” (Luke 20:9, ESV). 

When those who gathered around Jesus in the temple heard the words, “A man planted a vineyard”, they would have immediately thought of the Isaiah 5 passage we read at the beginning of this sermon. These people were familiar with the Old Testament Scriptures, and Isaiah 5 is a very famous text. 

As I was studying this text, the thought occurred to me, I should set Isaiah 5:1-7 alongside Luke 20:9-18 to see how they relate to each other. I’m glad I did. The two passages mirror one another very closely. The structure of each is the same. They are both chiasms, which means that the first half of the prophecy mirrors the second half and that the two halves are divided by a central point. A, B, C, centre point D, C’, B’, A’ —this is the structure of Isaiah 5 and Luke 20:9-18. Once you see the matching structures, it is very interesting and instructive to compare the parts. 

A — As has been said, the prophecies of Isaiah 5:1-7 and Luke 20:9-18 begin similarly. In Isaiah 5:1, the prophet says, “Let me sing for my beloved my love song concerning his vineyard.” As the song progresses, it becomes clear that the “beloved” is the LORD God of Israel, and the vineyard represents all Israel. The same is true of the beginning of Jesus’ parable. It begins with the words, ‘A man planted a vineyard.” As the parable progresses, it becomes clear that, like Isaiah 5, the man represents God, and the vineyard represents Israel in general. There is a big difference, though. Whereas in Isaiah 5, no other characters are introduced to make distinctions between people within Israel, Jesus mentions “tenants”. Luke 20:9 says, “A man planted a vineyard and let it out to tenants and went into another country for a long while.” A tenant is a renter. In this context, a tenant is a farmer who does not own the land, but leases it so that he might farm it. The expectation is that he would give some of the produce to the owner of the vineyard. As has been said, the vineyard represents Old Covenant Israel in general, but who do these tenants symbolize? They must symbolize the leaders or principal men within Israel—men like the chief priests, scribes, and elders who had approached Jesus in the temple to question and challenge his authority. In this parable, these leaders within Israel are represented by tenants to show that the vineyard of Israel was not theirs, but God’s, and that they had a responsibility to care for God’s vineyard, Israel. They were to protect it and cultivate it to ensure it would produce good and bountiful fruit, to the glory of God. So you can see that Jesus’ parable is more pointed than Isaiah’s song. Whereas the prophecy of Isaiah 5:1-7 is a condemnation of Israel in general, in this parable, Jesus focuses his attention on the leaders of Israel, represented by these tenants. 

B — The second scene of the prophecy of Isaiah 5 also mirrors the second scene in Jesus’ parable. In Isaiah 5:2, we read, “and he [the beloved] looked for [his vineyard] to yield grapes…” In Luke 20:10 we read, “When the time came, he sent a servant to the tenants, so that they would give him some of the fruit of the vineyard.” What do the two passages share in common? The owner of the vineyard wished to have some of the fruit from his vineyard. Where do the passages differ? Jesus introduces another set of characters to make further distinctions within Old Covenant Israel. He says that the owner “sent a servant to the tenants, so that they would give him some of the fruit of the vineyard.” We know who the tenants represent—the leading men of Old Covenant Israel. Who does the servant represent? As the parable progresses, it becomes clear that this servant (and two others) represent the prophets of God who ministered to Old Covenant Israel. It was the job of the prophets to declare the word of God to the people, to call them to repentance, faith, and good deeds. The prophets were God’s ministers. Indeed, they were servants whose aim it was to move the people to bear spiritual fruit to the glory of God.

C —  The third scene of the prophecy of Isaiah 5 also mirrors the third scene in Jesus’ parable. Isaiah 5:2 goes on to say, “and he looked for it to yield grapes, but it yielded wild grapes” (Isaiah 5:2, ESV). This means that Israel did not produce good fruit, but bad. Instead of repentance, faith, and good deeds, they were rebellious and sinful. Corresponding to this, Luke 20:10 goes on to say, “When the time came, he sent a servant to the tenants, so that they would give him some of the fruit of the vineyard. But the tenants beat him and sent him away empty-handed. And he sent another servant. But they also beat and treated him shamefully, and sent him away empty-handed. And he sent yet a third. This one also they wounded and cast out” (Luke 20:10-12, ESV). When the prophecy of Isaiah 5 and the parable of Luke 20 are set side by side, it becomes clear that, while Isaiah condemned Israel in general for the sins of bloodshed and injustice (these were the wild grapes they produced), Jesus’s parable condemns the leaders of Israel in particular for their repeated rejection, mistreatment, and even murder of the prophets God had sent to them (these are the wild grapes Christ condemned them for).

D — The fourth scene of the prophecy of Isaiah 5 mirrors the fourth scene in Jesus’ parable, and this is the central point of both passages. In Isaiah 5:3, the beloved, that is to say, the LORD, speaks, saying, “And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah, judge between me and my vineyard. What more was there to do for my vineyard, that I have not done in it? When I looked for it to yield grapes, why did it yield wild grapes?” (Isaiah 5:3-4, ESV). And in Luke 20:13, the owner of the vineyard, that is to say, the LORD, speaks, saying, “What shall I do? I will send my beloved son; perhaps they will respect him” (Luke 20:13, ESV). What do the two passages share in common at this central point? In both, the owner of the vineyard asks a question: “What more was there to do for my vineyard?” or “What shall I do?” How do the passages differ? In Isaiah 5, the implied answer is, nothing. It’s time for judgment, and so it was. In Jesus’ parable, the answer is this: “I will send my beloved son; perhaps they will respect him.” Who does the beloved son of the vineyard owner represent? Clearly, he represents Jesus, the eternal Son of God incarnate, the Messiah, the great Prophet, Priest, and King promised from long ago. The tenants of Israel did not respect the prophets of old! Perhaps they would respect the Son, or so the thinking goes within the parable. 

C’ — The fifth scene of the prophecy of Isaiah 5 also mirrors the fifth scene in Jesus’ parable. Isaiah 5:4 says, “What more was there to do for my vineyard, that I have not done in it? When I looked for it to yield grapes, why did it yield wild grapes?” Here we have another reference to wild grapes, that is to say, to the sin of the people. We should not be surprised to see the same pattern in Christ’s parable. Verse 14: “But when the tenants saw [the son], they said to themselves, ‘This is the heir. Let us kill him, so that the inheritance may be ours.’ And they threw him out of the vineyard and killed him.” (Luke 20:14–15, ESV) Clearly, this symbolizes what was soon to happen in Jerusalem. The tenants of Israel — the high priests, scribes, and elders — would soon conspire together against Jesus, the Son of God incarnate — the beloved son of the vineyard owner—to put him to death. Why would they kill him? They would kill him because they wanted the vineyard to be theirs! They had power and authority in the vineyard, and they did not want to give it up! This is why they rejected and killed the prophets of old, and this is why they rejected and killed the beloved Son of God.  

B’ —  The sixth scene of the prophecy of Isaiah 5 also mirrors the sixth scene in Jesus’ parable. In Isaiah 5:5, the LORD says, “And now I will tell you what I will do to my vineyard…” And in Luke 20:15, Jesus raises the question, “What then will the owner of the vineyard do to them?” The similarities between the two texts are obvious, but there is an important difference. In Isaiah 5, the LORD says, “And now I will tell you what I will do to my vineyard…”, that is to say, to Israel in general. In Luke 20:15, Jesus asks, “What then will the owner of the vineyard do to them”, that is to say, to the tenants? 

A’ — Both passages conclude with an answer or a declaration of judgment. In Isaiah 5:5-6, the LORD says, “And now I will tell you what I will do to my vineyard. I will remove its hedge, and it shall be devoured; I will break down its wall, and it shall be trampled down. I will make it a waste; it shall not be pruned or hoed, and briers and thorns shall grow up; I will also command the clouds that they rain no rain upon it.” These words from Isaiah the prophet would be fulfilled in the year 722 BC, when the northern kingdom of Israel was conquered by the Assyrians, and in the year 586 BC, when the southern kingdom of Judah was conquered by the Babylonians and the people were carried off into captivity. As you may know, some from Judah would return to Jerusalem 70 years later in fulfilment of other prophecies previously made. 

Brothers and sisters, it is important to note that what Christ here describes as the consequence for the murder of the vineyard owner’s Son is very different from what is described in Isaiah’s prophecy. What Isaiah described was consistent with conquest and captivity. What Isaiah described was judgment that was to come upon all Israel.  But what Christ describes here is different. It is the judgment of the original tenants of the vineyard, followed by a change in management. The old tenants would be judged. The vineyard of God would remain. But it would be given to others. Hear the words of Christ again: the owner of the vineyard “will come and destroy those tenants and give the vineyard to others.” 

This was not the first time Christ spoke of this great change that was soon to take place. He spoke of these things earlier in his ministry, too. In Matthew 8, Christ commended the great faith of a Roman centurion, saying, “Truly, I tell you, with no one in Israel have I found such faith” (Matthew 8:10, ESV). In verse 11, he spoke of the future, saying, “I tell you, many will come from east and west and recline at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven, while the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matthew 8:11-12, ESV). In Matthew 21:43, we hear Christ speak to the leaders of Israel, saying, “Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits” (Matthew 21:43, ESV). Both of these passages are about the great transition that was about to happen. The kingdom or vineyard of Israel was about to be taken from the Hebrews and given to the Gentiles.

The same message is communicated here in the parable of the wicked tenants, wherein Christ teaches that God, the owner of the vineyard of Israel, would soon come in judgment to destroy those tenants of old who had rejected and mistreated his servants in the past, and would soon kill the beloved Son of God, in attempt to have his inheritance and authority as their own. These tenants would be judged, and the vineyard of God would be given to others.

The rest of the New Testament describes the fulfilment of these prophecies. In the remainder of the Gospel of Luke, we will witness the tenants of Old Covenant Israel conspire together to put the beloved Son of God to death in a vain attempt to have his inheritance and authority for themselves. 

In Luke’s second volume, the book of The Acts Of The Apostles, we see the beginning stages of the judgment of those tenants of old and the transfer of the management of God’s vineyard to others. Consider Acts 13:26: “And Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly [to Jews], saying, ‘It was necessary that the word of God be spoken first to you. Since you thrust it aside and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles” (Acts 13:46, ESV). In Acts 18:6 we read, “And when [the Jews] opposed and reviled [Paul], he shook out his garments and said to them, ‘Your blood be on your own heads! I am innocent. From now on I will go to the Gentiles” (Acts 18:6, ESV). In Acts 28:28, Paul spoke to the Jewish leaders in Rome, saying, “Therefore let it be known to you that this salvation of God has been sent to the Gentiles; they will listen” (Acts 28:28, ESV).

The same Paul speaks of this great transition in his letter to the Romans, saying, “Lest you be wise in your own sight, I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And in this way all Israel will be saved…” (Romans 11:25–26, ESV). 

Dear friends, the true Israel of God remains even to this present day. Or to use the language of Jesus’ parable, God’s vineyard remains. But in these last days, that is to say, in the days between Christ’s first and second comings, the vineyard of God, or the true Israel of God, has been given to Gentiles. Though elect Jews remain, by in large, the kingdom of God [has been] taken away from [them] and given to a people producing its fruits” (Matthew 21:43, ESV), “a partial hardening has come upon [ethnic] Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in”.  “And in this way all Israel [the true Israel of God consisting of all who are united to Christ by faith from from amongst ethnic Jews and ethnic Gentiles] will be saved” (Romans 11:26, ESV). Friends, nowhere do the Scriptures speak of an eventual return of the kingdom of God or the vineyard of God to ethnic Israel. That idea is a common myth read into the pages of Holy Scripture. 

While the book of Acts describes the beginning of this transition away from ethnic and earthly Israel and to the nations, and while the epistles speak of these realities, the fulfilment of Jesus’s words concerning the owner of the vineyard coming to “destroy those tenants and give the vineyard to others” happened in a most pronounced way in the year 70 AD when the Romans under emperor Titus, besieged Jerusalem, slaughtered its population, and tore everything in the city, including the great and magnificent temple, to the ground. In Luke 19:43-44, Jesus predicted the destruction of the city of Jerusalem and the temple. In Luke 13:35, Jesus declared that the temple was forsaken. But here in this parable, Jesus focuses his attention on the principal or leading men of Old Covenant Israel and declares that they will be judged and removed as tenants of God’s vineyard, and that new tenants will be appointed in their place.  

[Dear brothers and sisters, do you understand what this means for us? It means that those who are united to Christ by faith are the vineyard of God and the true Israel of God. Ethnicity does not matter under the New Covenant. Your genealogy does not matter. What matters is faith in Jesus the Messiah. If you have Jesus as Lord and King, you belong to him. You are the Israel of God. You are God’s vineyard. The vineyard of God under the Old Covenant often produced wild grapes. But under the New Covenant, God has given his vineyard to others who will produce its fruit. Are you producing good fruit, brothers and sisters? Are you producing the fruit of the Spirit—“love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control”? (Galatians 5:22–23, ESV). The Old Covenant Israel of God was often fruitless, and that is because that covenant did not produce regeneration. But all who are in the New Covenant are regenerated by the Holy Spirit (see Jeremiah 31:31ff.). And regenerated persons will, over time, bear the fruit of the Holy Spirit as they abide in Christ. Are you bearing fruit, brothers and sisters—the fruit of repentance, faith, and good deeds? 

Furthermore, as we view ourselves as the New Covenant Israel of God and the vineyard of God, there is special application for pastors and elders, and other leading men, who are to be regarded as tenants. Are we being faithful to tend to the vineyard of God, to protect it, weed it, prune and water it, so that it produces good fruit—fruit that is pleasing to God, the owner of this vineyard, and to God’s Son, the heir? May God help us to be good and faithful tenants, and not wicked tenants, like these chief priests, scribes, and elders were.]  

Now, back to our parable. Notice, the chief priests, scribes, and elders understood exactly what Jesus meant by this parable. They knew it was an indictment against them and an announcement concerning the judgment that was soon to come upon them. Look at the middle of verse 16: “When they heard this, they said, ‘Surely not!’” (Luke 20:16, ESV), or may it never be! To be clear, they were not troubled by the fact that their forefathers had killed the prophets or that they would soon kill the vineyard owner’s son, but that they, the tenants of Old Covenant Israel, would soon be judged and that the vineyard would be given to others who would productive its fruit. It was to this thought that they replied, “Surely not”, or may it never be.

It was at this very moment that Jesus “looked directly at [the chief priests, scribes, and elders] and said, “What then is this that is written: ‘The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone’? Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces, and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him’” (Luke 20:17–18, ESV). 

The saying, “The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone”, is from Psalm 118:22. Go and read that Psalm later and see that it has everything to do with the arrival of the Messiah in Jerusalem. This particular verse reveals that, ironically, the Messiah would be rejected by the builders, or principal men, of Israel. Nevertheless, this rejected stone would become the cornerstone, that is to say, the precious and important stone in God’s temple.

The saying, “Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces” alludes to Isaiah 8:14-15 which speaks of the Lord, saying, “And he will become a sanctuary and a stone of offense and a rock of stumbling to both houses of Israel, a trap and a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem. And many shall stumble on it. They shall fall and be broken; they shall be snared and taken” (Isaiah 8:14–15, ESV). So the Lord is a sanctuary to some and stone of offence to others. Those who take refuge in Jesus the Messiah will be saved! Those who stumble over him will be broken to pieces.

The saying, “and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him,” alludes to the prophecy of Daniel 2:34ff., which portrays the Messiah as a stone “cut out by no human hand” which would topple nations. Daniel 2:44 says, “And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that shall never be destroyed, nor shall the kingdom be left to another people. It shall break in pieces all these kingdoms and bring them to an end, and it shall stand forever…” (Daniel 2:44, ESV). This is the kingdom of Jesus the Messiah. 

Do not forget that Jesus cited these Old Testament prophesies containing references to stones while teaching in the temple, being surrounded by the great and marvelous stones of that magnificent structure. This he did not long after declaring that soon Jerusalem would be destroyed, and not one stone would be left standing upon another (Luke 19:44). One stone would remain. He is the cornerstone of God’s New Covenant temple, Jesus Christ the Lord. 

Conclusion

I think the high priests, scribes, and elders got more than they were bargaining for when they stormed into the temple to challenge Jesus’s authority and to question him, saying, “Tell us by what authority you do these things, or who it is that gave you this authority” (Luke 20:2, ESV). Jesus’s answer was very clear. His authority is from God, for he is the Lord’s Messiah, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world, just as John the Baptist declared. More than this, he is the beloved Son of God incarnate, just as the voice from heaven declared when John baptized him. He is, in fact, the son of a vineyard owner. Though the tenants would reject and kill him, he would rise. Indeed, “The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone. This is the LORD’s doing; it is marvelous in our eyes” (Psalm 118:22-23, ESV).

Baptist Catechism 65

Q. 65. How is the Sabbath to be sanctified?

A. The Sabbath is to be sanctified by a holy resting all that day, even from such worldly employments and recreations as are lawful on other days, and spending the time in the public and private exercises of God’s worship, except so much as is to be taken up in the works of necessity and mercy.  (Lev. 23:3; Isa. 58:13,14; Isa. 66:23; Matt. 12:11,12)

Scripture Reading: Isaiah 58:13-14

“If you turn back your foot from the Sabbath, from doing your pleasure on my holy day, and call the Sabbath a delight and the holy day of the LORD honorable; if you honor it, not going your own ways, or seeking your own pleasure, or talking idly; then you shall take delight in the LORD, and I will make you ride on the heights of the earth; I will feed you with the heritage of Jacob your father, for the mouth of the LORD has spoken.” (Isaiah 58:13-14, ESV)

*****

Please excuse any typos and misspellings within this manuscript. It has been published online for the benefit of the saints of Emmaus Reformed Baptist Church but without the benefit of proofreading.

*****

Introduction

Questions 62 through 67 of the Baptist Catechism are about the fourth commandment, which is “Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.” With the help of catechism questions 63-65, we learned that the practice of Sabbath keeping was not unique to Old Covenant Israel, but is for all people living in all places and times. The command was first given to Adam, remember? It was not first given to Abraham or to Israel through Moses. All people ought to worship God alone, not with images, with reverence for his name, setting one day in seven apart as holy unto the Lord as a day for rest and for worship.

On which day is the Sabbath to be kept? From the creation of the world until the resurrection of Christ, the Sabbath day was the seventh day, which we call Saturday. The seventh day Sabbath fit the Covenant of Works that was made with Adam in the garden, remember? It communicated that faithful work would lead to eternal rest. Adam failed to enter that rest. But the seventh day Sabbath remained, one, as a reminder of what Adam failed to obtain, and two, as a reminder of the promise of God to provide a Redeemer from the seed of the woman (a second Adam) who would, in the fulness of time, earn eternal rest through his faithful obedience.     

On which day is the Sabbath to be observed now that the Messiah has come, has finished his work, and has entered into his rest? The Sabbath day is now the first day of the week, which we call Sunday. Christ met with his disciples after his resurrection on the first day of the week to establish this pattern (see especially John’s Gospel). The early church assembled on the first day, and they called it the Lord’s Day (see Acts 20:7, Rev 1:10). And this practice has remained throughout the history of the church. The first day of the week (Sunday) is to be regarded as the Christian, or Lord’s Day, Sabbath. 

All of that is review. Now we ask, how is the Sabbath to be sanctified? In other words, how are we to go about keeping the Sabbath day holy? What should we do, and what should we not do on the Lord’s Day Sabbath? 

You will notice that our catechism does not provide a detailed list of things appropriate (or not appropriate) for the Sabbath day. Instead, it presents broad principles. Of course, we must apply these principles in a specific way, and that will require wisdom.  

*****

Baptist Catechism 65

How is the Sabbath to be sanctified? Answer: “The Sabbath is to be sanctified by a holy resting all that day…”

The word sanctified means to “set apart as holy”. The Sabbath day is not a common day. It is a holy day. In our culture, we have many holidays. But which holy day is the Christian bound to observe? It is not Christmas, Good Friday, or Easter. And neither is the New Covenant Christian bound to observe the many holy days that were given to Israel under the Old Mosaic Covenant. Paul makes this clear in Colossians 2:16, saying, “Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.” (Colossians 2:16-17, ESV). The word Sabbath is plural in the Greek, by the way—it ought to be translated as “Sabbaths”. There were many Sabbath or rest days to be observed by the Jews throughout the year under the Old Covenant. The Christian is not bound to observe these. And neither is the Christian bound to observe the seventh-day Sabbath of old. The Christian is bound to observe the Lord’s Day Sabbath only. One day in seven was set apart as holy for Adam in the garden. One day in seven was set apart as holy for Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Old Covenant Israel under Moses. And one day in seven is set apart for all who are united by faith to the second Adam, Jesus Christ the Lord. 

Our catechism is clear that the Sabbath day is a day for rest. But the question must be asked, rest from what? Is the Sabbath day a day for sleeping? Well, naps are certainly permitted, if needed. But truly, the day is to be a day full of a particular kind of activity, as we will soon see. The word “holy” helps us to see this. Not only is it a day set apart for rest. It is also a day set apart for holy purposes, namely, worship. Leviticus 23:3 clarifies this, saying, “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.” (Leviticus 23:3, ESV). Convocation means “a formal assembly”. A holy convocation is an assembly for worship. So no, the Sabbath day is not a day for sleeping in or napping. It is a day for worship. If your view of the Lord’s Day sabbath is that it is primarily a day for physical rest and rejuvenation, I’m afraid you’ve missed the point entirely. Indeed, 

So again I ask, what are we to rest from? Our catechism is right to say that we are to rest “from such worldly employments and recreations as are lawful on other days…” In other words, the Sabbath day is a stop day. It is a day to cease (or rest) from a certain kind of activity, namely, common work and recreation so that we can devote ourselves to another kind of activity, namely, public and private worship. Common activities are to be set aside. Holy activities are to be taken up. 

The Lord’s Day Sabbath is not a day for common work, brothers and sisters. The Lord’s Day Sabbath is not a day for recreation. What, then, is it a day for? Our catechism is right to say that we are to “[spend] the time in the public and private exercises of God’s worship, except so much as is to be taken up in the works of necessity and mercy.”  

I like the word “spend”. It reminds us that time is spent like money is spent. We only have so much of it, and we have to decide how to spend it. On the Lord’s Day, we are to spend the day (the whole day) “in the public and private exercises of God’s worship.” As has already been mentioned, the Sabbath day is a day for holy convocation, or assembling. That is what “public… exercises of God’s worship” refers to. The church of Christ is to assemble on the Lord’s Day for corporate worship. And this is why the writer of Hebrews exhorts us to, “not [neglect] to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near” (Hebrews 10:25, ESV).

The day is to be spent in “public… exercises of God’s worship.” And after public worship is over  (however much time the church decides to devote to that), Christians are then to spend their time in  “private exercises of God’s worship.” I take this to mean that we are to continue in a spirit of worship as we go our separate ways. We are to think upon the word that was preached. We are to pray. We are to read Scripture and talk about Scripture. We might even continue to sing! 

Are we to worship God privately on the other days of the week, too? Yes, of course! But the Lord’s Day Sabbath is a day set aside for this. By resting from common work and common recreation, we are freed to worship the Lord corporately and privately in a pronounced and focused way. To state the matter differently, on the other days of the week, we are often consumed with work and distracted by recreation. Work and recreation are not bad things. In fact, approached rightly and within proper boundaries, they are very good things. It is even possible to honor the Lord in our work and in our recreations, Monday through Saturday. But on Sunday, we are invited to set these common things aside to fix our attention squarely upon the Lord, to worship him, and to delight in him.

Now, to be clear, I do not know of any individuals or families that spend the entire Lord’s Day in strict private or family worship after assembling with the congregation. If that is what is intended by our catechism (and confession), then I would have to confess that I fall short of it. I would like to think (and perhaps I am wrong) that our catechism is simply teaching us to go on from public worship in a spirit of private worship. Stated negatively, our catechism is saying that we must not run off from corporate worship to common work and recreation, but to continue to keep the day—the whole day—as holy unto the Lord by thinking and conversing about the things of God in private. 

Lastly, our catechism mentions two exceptions: “except so much as is to be taken up in the works of necessity and mercy.” A work of necessity is a work that absolutely cannot wait until the following day. If your ox falls into a ditch (does anyone have an ox?), you should pull it out to preserve the life of the ox and your property. If a water pipe bursts under your house, you should fix it. If your neighbor is experiencing a difficulty like this, you should help them on the Sabbath day. An act of mercy is similar. It is an act of kindness done for someone in need. The Lord’s Day Sabbath is a good day for this, as Jesus demonstrated by healing the lame and the sick on the Sabbath. And it should also be recognized that some people are engaged in professions that involve doing acts of necessity or mercy on the Lord’s Day. Emergency room doctors, police officers, and perhaps even water district employees will sometimes need to work on Sundays. Christians who are engaged in professions like these should do their very best to have Sundays off, however.  

*****

Conclusion

Brothers and sisters, it is no secret that Christian individuals, families, and churches sometimes struggle to know what exactly should be done, and what should not be done, on the Lord’s Day Sabbath. I would like to conclude by offering a few pieces of advice that I hope will help.  

First, think about the purpose of the day and ask, does this activity (whatever it is) fit with the purpose of the day? This general question will serve you better than a strict and detailed list of dos and don’ts. Most of the time, the answer will be obvious. Does playing in a baseball league fit with the purpose of the day? Does zoning out on a movie or the Super Bowl fit? What about working on the house remodel, or doing some other chore or task that can easily wait until Monday? It’s hard to see how these sorts of activities could possibly agree with the purpose of  the day. These are clear examples of common work and recreation that ought to be reserved for the common days of the week. 

Secondly, when trying to encourage others to keep the Sabbath day holy, appeal to the goodness of the thing. By that I mean, emphasize what it is that we get to do on the Lord’s Day Sabbath, namely, delight in the Lord, rather than what we don’t get to do on the day. The day was designed to be a blessing and delight to us, and so this is what we should emphasize.   

Thirdly, be careful with the little ones. Do not expect more out of them than they can give. Little ones do need to play. They have a limited ability to focus when compared to adults. I hope our children delight in the Lord’s Day as they grow up in the church. I hope they consider it to be the best of all the days. Brothers and sisters, we must be careful not to frustrate them with unreasonable expectations. With that said, we should encourage our children to keep the Lord’s Day with more and more care and seriousness as they grow older. Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 13:11 seem to apply. “When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways” (1 Corinthians 13:11, ESV). Our expectations of children ought to be reasonable. At the same time, we need to encourage our children to go on toward maturity in all things, including honoring the Lord’s Day Sabbath. 

Fourthly, be patient with others even as you remain resolute in your convictions. Very few Christians today honor the Lord’s Day Sabbath. We need to leave room for others to grow in their understanding of this doctrine and in their application of it. Is there a place for exhortation? Yes, of course. When you see a brother or sister violating the Sabbath Day in an obvious way, it is right that you encourage them to turn from sin and to obedience in Christ. But we must be loving and patient with each other in all that we do. 

Fifthly, leave room for differences of opinion regarding the particulars of Sabbath keeping. I think you would agree with me that there are activities that clearly do not agree with the purpose of the day. The Lord’s Day is not a day for common work, nor is it a day for recreation. I hope you all agree with that. But in my mind, there may be some activities that some would classify as recreation that may in fact serve the purpose of the day. I’m thinking of things like a walk, hike, drive, game of catch, or a bike ride with your children. All of these activities can be done in such a way as to encourage conversation and contemplation concerning the things of God and to serve the purpose of the day.  Now, it may be that you are convinced that these things ought not to be done on the Lord’s Day, and that is fine. But I would encourage you not to attempt to bind the consciences of others on these things, but to consider them matters of opinion. 

Sixthly, we must call the Sabbath a delight. I think it is right for us to view the Lord’s Day Sabbath as a celebration, festival, or feast day! It is to be a joyous day! But note this: The Sabbath day is to be a delight to us, not because we spend the day pleasing the flesh, but because we feed the soul by delighting ourselves in God and in Jesus Christ, who is Lord of the Sabbath.  

Old Testament Reading: Isaiah 56:1-8

“Thus says the LORD: ‘Keep justice, and do righteousness, for soon my salvation will come, and my righteousness be revealed. Blessed is the man who does this, and the son of man who holds it fast, who keeps the Sabbath, not profaning it, and keeps his hand from doing any evil. ‘Let not the foreigner who has joined himself to the LORD say, ‘The LORD will surely separate me from his people’; and let not the eunuch say, ‘Behold, I am a dry tree.’ For thus says the LORD: ‘To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths, who choose the things that please me and hold fast my covenant, I will give in my house and within my walls a monument and a name better than sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting name that shall not be cut off. And the foreigners who join themselves to the LORD, to minister to him, to love the name of the LORD, and to be his servants, everyone who keeps the Sabbath and does not profane it, and holds fast my covenant— these I will bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer; their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be accepted on my altar; for my house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples.’ The Lord GOD, who gathers the outcasts of Israel, declares, ‘I will gather yet others to him besides those already gathered.’” (Isaiah 56:1-8, ESV)

New Testament Reading: Luke 19:41-48

“And when he drew near and saw the city, he wept over it, saying, ‘Would that you, even you, had known on this day the things that make for peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes. For the days will come upon you, when your enemies will set up a barricade around you and surround you and hem you in on every side and tear you down to the ground, you and your children within you. And they will not leave one stone upon another in you, because you did not know the time of your visitation.’ And he entered the temple and began to drive out those who sold, saying to them, ‘It is written, ‘My house shall be a house of prayer,’ but you have made it a den of robbers.’ And he was teaching daily in the temple. The chief priests and the scribes and the principal men of the people were seeking to destroy him, but they did not find anything they could do, for all the people were hanging on his words.” (Luke 19:41-48, ESV)

*****

Please excuse any typos and misspellings within this manuscript. It has been published online for the benefit of the saints of Emmaus Reformed Baptist Church but without the benefit of proofreading.

Introduction

It would be difficult to overstate the importance of the city of Jerusalem and the temple in the midst of that city to the Old Covenant people of God from the days of King David onward. Jerusalem was not only the capital city of Old Covenant Israel, it was the place where the glory of God was manifest and where the people of God would assemble to worship. The people of Israel made regular pilgrimages up to Jerusalem to worship God there through the offering up of sacrifices.

In the previous sermon, I reminded you that beginning with Luke 9:51, Jesus had set his face toward Jerusalem. From that point in Jesus’ ministry, Luke reports that Jesus “went on his way through towns and villages, teaching and journeying toward Jerusalem” (Luke 13:22, ESV). Jesus’s journey toward Jerusalem was very important, for not only was he a Hebrew man, he also claimed to be the Messiah, the Anointed King of God’s everlasting Kingdom. What would Jesus do once in Jerusalem? Would he attempt to overthrow the Romans? Would he make Jerusalem the center of his operation?  No doubt, questions like these were on everyone’s mind. 

It must be remembered that Jesus had already said what would happen to him in Jerusalem. He had spoken to his disciples, saying, “‘See, we are going up to Jerusalem, and everything that is written about the Son of Man by the prophets will be accomplished. For he will be delivered over to the Gentiles and will be mocked and shamefully treated and spit upon. And after flogging him, they will kill him, and on the third day he will rise.’ But they understood none of these things. This saying was hidden from them, and they did not grasp what was said” (Luke 18:31–34, ESV). Furthermore, Jesus had explained that his kingdom would not immediately appear. In Luke 17: 20-21, “Being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, he answered them, ‘The kingdom of God is not coming in ways that can be observed, nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or ‘There!’ for behold, the kingdom of God is in the midst of you” (Luke 17:20–21, ESV). Remember, the Parable of the Ten Minas found in Luke 19:11-27 was told to correct the misconception that the kingdom of God would appear immediately. Even with these teachings from Jesus, the people remained curious and uncertain concerning the things Christ would do once in Jerusalem. Would he make Jerusalem his capital city? Would he oppose the Romans? Would he treasure the temple? What Jesus did and said once he arrived in Jerusalem must have shocked everyone.

What did Jesus do when he finally entered Jerusalem? He wept over the city. He announced that the city and the temple in the midst of it would soon be besieged and destroyed. He then cleansed the temple and taught in the midst of it as his people drew near. 

Jesus Wept Over Jerusalem

First, let us consider that Jesus wept over the city of Jerusalem when he arrived. This is what Luke describes in verses 41 and 42. “And when he drew near and saw the city, he wept over it, saying, ‘Would that you, even you, had known on this day the things that make for peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes’” (Luke 19:41-42, ESV).

Why did Jesus weep over Jerusalem? He wept over the city because the vast majority of those who lived within it were blind and unbelieving. They could not see that Jesus was the Messiah that God had promised. Though the gospel of the kingdom had been proclaimed to them by Jesus and his Apostles, they did not believe it. Christ came to bring peace. Through him, men find peace with God, spiritual peace within, peace in this life, and in the life to come. But these people could not see the things that make for peace—they could not see Jesus or his kingdom. They could not comprehend the gospel. They remained in their sins, therefore, and at enmity with God. More than this, judgment and destruction would soon come upon the city, so Jesus wept over the city and those who lived there..

Of all people, those living in Jerusalem should have known the things that make for peace. They had the Old Testament Scriptures, which speak of Christ. The city of Jerusalem, the temple, the priesthood, and the sacrifices they offered continuously testified concerning Christ Jesus and the atoning sacrifice he would offer up to God to secure peace between God and man. And as has been said, Jesus Christ and his Apostles ministered among these people, proclaiming the gospel of the Kingdom and performing many signs and wonders to prove their message was true. This is why Christ wept, saying, “Would that you, even you, had known on this day the things that make for peace!” 

The words, “But now they are hidden from your eyes” indicate that the time was up. For three years, Jesus had ministered in their midst. The people, and especially the leaders of Israel, who were centered in Jerusalem, had rejected Jesus. Finally, God gave this rebellious and unbelieving people over to judicial blindness. This is how God works with rebellions and unbelieving sinners. He will often judge sinners by giving them over to their sin and rebellion. As Romans 1:24 says, “Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen” (Romans 1:24–25, ESV). There is a warning to sinners found here. Men and women must not toy with sin or drag their feet as it pertains to repentance and faith. No, the Scriptures urge us men and women, staying, “Seek the LORD while he may be found; call upon him while he is near; let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; let him return to the LORD, that he may have compassion on him, and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon” (Isaiah 55:6–7, ESV).

As you may know, there are some who will attempt to use this passage about Jesus weeping over Jerusalem to deny the doctrines of unconditional election or predestination, reprobation, and particular redemption. The argument goes something like this: See, Jesus wept over the unbelief in Jerusalem. This indicates that Christ, the Son of God incarnate, came to save all people and desires that all people be saved. When he went to the cross, he must have atoned for the sins of all.   

There are many problems with this view. 

First of all, this passage is not about predestination, reprobation, or atonement. It is about the arrival of the Messiah in Jerusalem. Those we may learn things about the heart of Christ for sinners, the purpose of the passage is not to teach us about predestination, reprobation, or atonement.

Secondly, other passages in Holy Scripture do directly teach us about the doctrines of predestination, reprobation, and atonement. For example, Ephesians 1:4-5 teaches that Christians have been chosen by God in Christ “before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will…” Romans 9:22 speaks of “vessels of wrath prepared for destruction” (Romans 9:22, ESV). And in John 10:15, Christ specifically says that he would “lay down [his] life for the sheep.” These texts, and many others like them, clearly teach that God has predestined some to everlasting life, has decreed to pass over others, and that Christ was sent to atone for the sins of many, but not all (see Matthew 26:28; Hebrews 9:28). Our interpretation of this narrative wherein we behold Christ weeping over the city of Jerusalem cannot contradict the clear teaching of Scripture concerning the doctrines of predestination, reprobation, and particular atonement.  

Thirdly, those who claim that Jesus’s weeping over Jerusalem disproves the doctrines of election and particular redemption forget that Jesus Christ was and is the Son of God incarnate. He is the person of the eternal Son of God, and he is human. The point is this: Christ did not weep over Jerusalem through his divine nature—God does not weep, brothers and sisters. He does not have passions like we have. He does not have eyes or tear ducts. Jesus wept over Jerusalem as a man, through the human nature he had assumed. Think of the story of the death of Jesus’s friend, Lazarus. According to his divine nature, Jesus decreed that Lazarus would die on the day that he died. It was as a man with a true and reasonable soul that Jesus wept when Lazarus died. And the same thing must be said when we consider Jesus’ weeping over Jerusalem. According to his divine nature, he decreed that Jerusalem would reject him, that he would be crucified there (see Acts 2:23), and that the city would soon afterward be destroyed (see Isaiah 46:10). It was according to his human nature that he wept. As a man, he wept, and he wept sincerely.  

Fourthly, this was no ordinary city that Jesus Christ wept over, but the precious and sacred city of Jerusalem. This was the city of God’s choosing. The temple was there. God’s glory was manifest there. Under the Old Covenant, from David’s day onward, worship was centered there. In the days of his earthly ministry, Christ did not weep over every city he came to. Though every village, town, and city Christ came to was certainly filled with rebellions and unbelieving sinners, I cannot think of a single instance wherein Christ wept over a city besides Jerusalem. And this he did only at the end of his earthly ministry, immediately before he would suffer and die in that place. Let us not pretend that Christ went around perpetually weeping over lost sinners in general or that he does so in heaven to this present day. Jesus wept over Jerusalem when he entered the city at the end of his earthly ministry, not long before his crucifixion. 

Fifthly, though it is true that Jesus wept sincerely as a man, we must remember that he was no mere man. He is the God-man, the Messiah, the anointed Prophet, Priest, and King of God’s eternal kingdom. May I suggest to you that when Jesus wept over Jerusalem, he ultimately did so to fulfill his prophetical office. Old Testament scholars have noticed that weeping is a prophetic sign indicating that judgment is on its way. In 2 Kings 8:11, the prophet Elisha wept before prophesying concerning the destruction that would soon come upon the people of Israel. The prophet Jeremiah is sometimes called the weeping prophet. In Jeremiah 9:1, he says, “Oh that my head were waters, and my eyes a fountain of tears, that I might weep day and night for the slain of the daughter of my people!” In Jeremiah 14:17, he says, “Let my eyes run down with tears night and day, and let them not cease, for the virgin daughter of my people is shattered with a great wound, with a very grievous blow.” When Jesus wept over Jerusalem, he wept as God’s Prophet. Prophets like Elisha and Jeremiah wept over calamities that would befall Israel, but Christ wept over the full and final destruction of Old Covenant Jerusalem and the temple. The closing of an era was around the corner. The Old Covenant was about to give way to the New. And so the man Jesus Christ, the eternal Word of God incarnate, sincerely wept when he came to Jerusalem, and in so doing, he signaled that judgment was soon to come.   

Jesus Announced The Destruction Of Jerusalem  And The Temple

This brings us to our second observation. When Jesus arrived at Jerusalem, he did not embrace the city or seek to make it the capital of his kingdom. No, he announced that the city and its temple would soon be besieged and destroyed.   

Look at verse 43. Jesus wept over Jerusalem, saying, “For the days will come upon you, when your enemies will set up a barricade around you and surround you and hem you in on every side and tear you down to the ground, you and your children within you. And they will not leave one stone upon another in you, because you did not know the time of your visitation” (Luke 19:43-44, ESV).

This prophecy concerning the destruction of Jerusalem would be fulfilled in the year 70 A.D. when the Romans, under emperor Titus, besieged Jerusalem, slaughtered its population, and tore everything in the city, including the great and magnificent temple, to the ground. If you wish to read a history us this, see The Wars Of The Jews, The History Of The Destruction Of Jerusalem, written by the Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus, in the year 75 A.D. 

 Why was Jerusalem destroyed? Christ said, “because you did not know the time of your visitation”. John Gill comments on this phrase, saying, “The time of the ministry of John the Baptist, of Christ, and his apostles in Judea, was the time of Jerusalem’s visitation in a way of mercy; which not being taken notice of, and observed, brought another kind of visitation upon them, even in a way of wrath and vengeance.” 

Gill goes on to list a number of explanations provided by unbelieving Jewish Rabbis for the destruction of Jerusalem. Some it was because the people “profaned the sabbath”, others “because they ceased reading the Shema (hear, O” Israel, &c.) morning and evening”. Others say it was because

children were not put to school. Still others are of the opinion that the city was destroyed “because there was no shame among them.” And others say it was because the people rejected and mocked the “the messengers of God”. This last reason is closest to the truth. John Gill is correct when he identifies the cause as “their rejection of Jesus, as the Messiah.” 

These things were decreed by God, it is true. But human freedom and responsibility are not removed. As Acts 2:23 says, “Jesus, [was] delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God”; nevertheless the people were guilty of crucifying and killing Jesus by the hands of lawless men.” In the same way, the destruction of Jerusalem was decreed, but it was because the people did not know the time of their visitation. God visited them by sending the Messiah to them. At first, it was a visitation of mercy. After the people rejected and killed the Messiah, it was time for a visitation of God’s wrath and judgment.

Sobering, isn’t it? And it is sobering, especially as we consider that this pattern we see wherein Christ came at first to show mercy and grace, and then, having been rejected by the Jews, returned in judgment against the Jews, will be repeated in a full and final way at the end of this present evil age. As the writer of Hebrews says, “so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him” (Hebrews 9:28, ESV). And he will also judge, for “it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment…” (Hebrews 9:27, ESV). Yes, Christ’s dealings with the Jews at the close of the Old Covenant era will be repeated at the end of time. He came at first to atone for sin. He will come again to judge and make all things new.  

Jesus Cleansed The Temple And Taught In It

What did Christ do when he arrived in Jerusalem? Did he rejoice as if he had arrived at home? Did he embrace the earthly city and proceed to make it the center of his inaugurated kingdom? No, to the contrary, he wept over the city and the people who resided within it and announced its destruction. Thirdly, Jesus cleansed the temple and taught in it. 

Look with me at verses 45-48. “And he entered the temple and began to drive out those who sold, saying to them, ‘It is written, ‘My house shall be a house of prayer,’ but you have made it a den of robbers.’ And he was teaching daily in the temple. The chief priests and the scribes and the principal men of the people were seeking to destroy him, but they did not find anything they could do, for all the people were hanging on his words.” (Luke 19:45–48, ESV)

When Luke mentions those who sold in the temple, he refers to the money changers and those who would sell animals, like sheep, oxen, and doves for sacrifice, often at exorbitant prices. These would set up shop in the outer courtyard intended for the Gentiles. Not only did this communicate that the Gentiles (non-Jews) were unimportant, it also gave the entrance of the temple the feel of a common marketplace as opposed to a sacred place set apart for prayer and worship. 

Luke tells us that Christ drove out those who sold, saying, “It is written, ‘My house shall be a house of prayer’”. This is a citation from Isaiah 56, which was read at the beginning of this sermon. As I have told you in the past, when an Old Testament text is cited in the New Testament, it is probably a good idea to go to that text and take a look around. Isaiah 56 is a beautiful passage, and it has a lot to do with the things that Jesus was doing in those days. ​​ In it, the LORD speaks through the prophet, saying, “for soon my salvation will come, and my righteousness be revealed.” In it, the LORD pronounces blessings on the man who “keeps the Sabbath”. In it the LORD invited the foreigner and the outcast to draw near. ‘“Let not the foreigner who has joined himself to the LORD say, ‘The LORD will surely separate me from his people’; and let not the eunuch say, ‘Behold, I am a dry tree.’ For thus says the LORD: ‘To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths, who choose the things that please me and hold fast my covenant, I will give in my house and within my walls a monument and a name better than sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting name that shall not be cut off.” No wonder Christ cleared the money changers and those who sold out of the court of the Gentiles! It was because the LORD had promised, saying, those who “holdfast my covenant— these I will bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer; their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be accepted on my altar; for my house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples.’ The Lord GOD, who gathers the outcasts of Israel, declares, ‘I will gather yet others to him besides those already gathered’” (Isaiah 56:1-8, ESV). As you can see, not only does Isaiah 56 say that the temple is a house of prayer, it also speaks of the day when the LORD’s salvation would finally come and says that on that day, the LORD would gather to himself the outcasts of Israel and many others besides these. Yes, even Gentiles would be gathered in. 

When Christ cleansed the temple, it was not because he planned to use it in his kingdom. No, he had just announced that destruction would soon come to this place. Earlier in Luke’s Gospel, Christ spoke of the temple, saying, “Behold, your house is forsaken” (Luke 13:35, ESV). He cleansed the temple and gathered his disciples around him to teach them within it:

One, to condemn the corruption of the Israelites’ religion. 

Two, to lay claim to the temple. This temple was his house. 

Three, to signal that Isaiah 56 (and Jeremiah 7:11) was being fulfilled. 

Four, to signal that the outcasts of Israel and the Gentiles would soon be gathered into the New Covenant temple, that is to say, the church (see 1 Peter 2:4ff.)

Five, to promote the purity of the New Covenant temple. When Christ cleansed the Old Covenant typological temple, saying that it was a house of prayer, while gathering his disciples to himself to teach them, he showed us what his New Covenant temple was to be. The church is made up of living stones who are disciples of Jesus. His church is a house of prayer. In it, his word is to dwell richly. As Paul wrote to the Colossians, “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God” (Colossians 3:16, ESV).

Conclusion

Dear brothers and sisters, this passage we have considered is immensely important, for it clarifies the relationship that Jesus Christ would have with the earthly city of Jerusalem and the Old Covenant temple in his inaugurated kingdom. As has been stated in previous sermons, his kingdom is here now, but not in ways that can be observed. It is a spiritual and heavenly kingdom presently. His kingdom is manifest on earth, not in any nation in particular, but in his churches. The Jerusalem of the New Covenant, Israel of God, is in heaven above, not on earth below. Its temple is not made of stone, but of converted persons made alive by the Holy Spirit who have their lives built on the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, with Christ as the cornerstone. This is what the Apostle Peter teaches when he speaks to disciples of Jesus, saying, “As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious, you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 2:4–5, ESV). 

May the Lord grant us clarity of mind concerning the nature of Christ’s kingdom presently, and by his grace, enable us to do this very thing: to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ, our great Prophet, Priest, and King.