“Practical” Preaching

Posted on by
Reply

Dr. John MacArthur (source):

More than once I have been asked why my sermons focus so much on biblical interpretation and not as much on personal application. In a similar vein, verse-by-verse Bible teaching and an emphasis on doctrine are sometimes criticized as being irrelevant and impractical.

My response to that is simple—and may sound familiar to you because I communicate the principle at every opportunity. The meaning of Scripture is the Scripture. If you don’t have the true meaning of the text, you don’t have the Word of God. That’s why exegesis (a linguistically and historically sound interpretation of the text) is the absolute and primary essential in every sermon.

So my priority and driving passion is to make the truth of Scripture known. I want to help people know what God’s Word says. I’m confident that if I can help men and women understand the implications of the Bible―to feel the full weight and meaning of divine truth―the Holy Spirit will guide them in the application of that truth to their individual lives and circumstances.

Yes, some biblical principles may seem more practical or more immediately applicable than others. But all Scripture is profitable for teaching, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness (2 Timothy 3:16). Teaching people what the Bible means is inherently practical. In fact, until a person understands the implications of a verse or passage, no sound application can be made.

It is the work of the Holy Spirit to make the most personal, individual applications of the truth of Scripture in the heart of the hearer—and He does that infallibly, in a way that I as a preacher cannot. He instructs and directs us in how to put God’s Word to work in our lives.

We see the evidence of that in the responses we receive from the people Grace to You is reaching. Every day we hear from men and women around the world, describing how the Lord is working in their lives through His Word and thanking us for our doctrinally focused resources. They bear witness to the practical value and universal relevance of the doctrine we teach. In fact, not long ago we received a long letter from a woman named Sandra. Here’s a portion of what she had to say:

I grew up in a home with loving Christian parents, but I rebelled against Christ during my teenage years. I took pride in my academic accomplishments and was generally a very proud individual. I was confident that I would become a successful attorney someday and live a life of affluence. My childhood upbringing kept me from rejecting God’s existence, but although I knew He existed, I did not have a relationship with Him.

God’s mercy and grace were poured on me one day as I drove from school to my afternoon job during the first year of my undergraduate studies. I switched my car radio from one station to another, searching for something fun, when I tuned in to a Christian station my father had preset. I had made a habit to simply skip over that station, but on this particular day I heard your familiar voice before I had the chance to change it. You were teaching on the subject of predestination. I continued listening with the sole intent of finding weaknesses in the argument, but the Lord used that message to bring me to repentance. That message was not sugarcoated. You did not mince words—you did not make me feel good. No, instead your message brought me to tears. The Lord used you through your faithful teaching of the Word of God to humble an angry, ungrateful, and proud sinner and to bring me to repentance and eternal life.

While I know that your service is not for the praise of anyone, I simply hope you are encouraged in knowing that the Lord has used you, through the teaching of His Word, to save souls and minister to people you were not even aware existed.

Every day, people like Sandra are tuning in on radio or looking to our website and finding biblical truth that speaks directly to their spiritual needs and circumstances. The Lord puts the teaching of His Word in a position to convict, rebuke, instruct, comfort, and encourage His people when and where He chooses.

And while we affirm God’s sovereignty over whom He reaches and how He works in lives, there is still a significant, human component. You and I have roles to fulfill, responsibilities to discharge, and blessings of a spiritual harvest in which to share.

John Piper and Gospel Confusion

Posted on by
6

Brothers I am troubled!

There’s no doubt that John Piper is one of the people God has used to impact my theological journey in a significant way. Much could be said about that. This blog is filled with many references to John Piper’s works.

However, in recent days I have become increasingly concerned about what Dr. Piper is teaching. He makes a distinction between initial justification and entering heaven, to the point that the gospel is confused, and some would even say, denied.

It is because I have greatly admired Dr. Piper that I have really tried to give him the benefit of the doubt on this. I really have. But the more I have read and the more I have re-read Piper’s material, the more troubled I have become. I would have expected the opposite to be true – that the more I read of his, the more clarity I would find to set my concerns aside. However, that is not the case in any way at all.

I am deeply troubled. John Piper is abundantly clear in what he is saying and that is what bothers me greatly.

Here’s a video by Pastor Patrick Hines of Bridwell Heights Presbyterian Church, Kingsport, Tennessee, responding to Piper in his own words.

Update: Since this video was made, Dr. Piper has posted the following article: https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/no-love-lost

I shared this article with Pastor Hines (the maker of the above video) and here is his reply:

Pastor Hines: The vast majority of what he says is, again, very biblical and sound. The problem is this: “There is no final salvation without the confirmation of justification in a life of holiness (2 Peter 1:10; 2 Thessalonians 2:13).” & “In our conversations with Roman Catholics, it will always be wise to emphasize how seriously we regard the necessity of sanctification for final salvation. It will not be surprising if they are puzzled.

Many evangelicals stumble over the claim that justification is by faith alone (Romans 3:28), and yet final salvation has the prerequisite of holiness (Hebrews 12:14). But this is centuries-long Reformed teaching.” What does “prerequisite of holiness” mean? What does “final salvation” mean? How does “final salvation” differ from “justification?” Clearly, in Piper’s thinking, it does differ. The Reformers and their successors all taught that our justification IS what “finally gets us to heaven.” Our justification is that eschatological verdict brought back in time and once and for all eternity made concerning our status before God’s law.

John Piper is not a stupid man. But surely he is well aware of the fact that the way he is stating this is going to upset the apple-cart. He needs to define what he means by “final salvation” and “prerequisite of holiness.” He doesn’t – and hence the danger of this ambiguous teaching. One Reformer, John Calvin, taught us: “Ambiguity is the fortress of heretics.”

Remember also that in his sermon, he said that “it is the surveyors who are confused because they asked ‘How do you get into heaven?'” John, I seriously have to wonder what Piper’s answer to that surveyor’s question would be now. Based on what Piper said, “You don’t get into heaven by faith alone,” Piper would have to say in response to that question: “By putting sin to death and pursuing holiness.” And that’s the problem with all of this.

John Samson: I believe the key question that STILL needs to be answered (regarding Dr. Piper’s teaching) is this one – “will there be people who were justified who do not enter heaven at the final judgment?” Because Dr. Piper makes a big distinction between the two things, I am not sure how he would answer, and that is especially concerning.

(Gal. 1; Jude:3)

Update: Patrick Hines’ interchange with someone on facebook:

Here are a couple of posts I’ve (Patrick) done in response to someone who is defending John Piper:

No one is reducing “salvation” to only justification. However, the usages of the term “salvation” have to be determined by each context in which they are used. Romans 5:9, Ephesians 2:8-10 – these passages are clearly using the term “saved” in the context of what is the legal grounds upon which we are saved from God’s wrath – i.e. the legal grounds upon which we are justified before God and thus are not subject to the avenging wrath of God. True faith in Christ is never alone in those justified – never. It is always accompanied by all other saving graces. But those other saving graces – the new birth, repentance unto life, and progressive sanctification are not and never could be the legal grounds of “final salvation” – i.e. the legal grounds upon which the wrath of God does not come against us. That’s what Piper is violating.

People can fuss all day long about “salvation” is broader than merely justification. That’s true. However, when you look at the specific usages of “salvation” and “saved” in Scripture, when Paul uses the terms he is usually speaking of the legal grounds upon which the sinner is saved from God’s avenging wrath. That legal grounds cannot ever, ever be our works, our sanctification. That’s why Paul is clear: Romans 5:9 “Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him.” Ephes. 2:8-10 “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, [9] not of works, lest anyone should boast. [10] For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.”

Your criticisms here, Michael Foster, are not against me, they are against the way in which Paul himself speaks of how sinners are saved. I get the impression you’d say to Paul himself when you look at those two key texts, Romans 5:9 and Ephesians 2:8-10, “Paul, I refuse to reduce salvation down to justification.” Your argument really isn’t with us, it’s with Paul. “Salvation” in theological discourse does refer to all of the other graces God brings about in the life of the redeemed and justified sinner, but when people speak of “final salvation” as being NOT by faith alone, but rather by our works – they are, in point of fact, talking about the very same thing Paul is in Ephesians 2:8-10 and Romans 5:9 – i.e. what it is that gets us past the judgment of God into heaven. And to say that we are saved from wrath NOT by Christ but by our works is a false gospel. That’s the problem here. And Piper needs to be denounced for it.

My opponent then asked: “Let me back away from the particulars of Piper’s statement for a moment to ask a clarifying question: Do you guys (Patrick & Rudy) believe that good works are necessary to salvation?”

To which I responded:

Ambiguity is the fortress of heretics. Necessary in what way? In the way Piper is teaching? As the legal grounds of our final salvation from God’s wrath? No. Do works necessarily accompany true faith? Yes. Because true faith is never alone in the person justified but is always and ever accompanied by all the other graces God brings about in the lives of His children: adoption, sanctification, the new birth, being conformed to the image of Christ. But those other saving graces are not the grounds upon which we are saved at the last judgment. You see, Piper is emphatic: “You don’t get into heaven by faith alone.” If he had said, “You don’t get into heaven having only been justified. You are also, if you have true faith, being renewed in the whole man after the image of God. God puts a beating heart of flesh in you in place of the heart of stone! God creates a hunger and thirst for righteousness. God starts a war in your against remaining indwelling sin! And that war will never end in this life. So, you don’t get into heaven having merely been justified. If you’ve been justified, that is the basis upon which you enter heaven – praise God. But God also conforms us to His image and makes us alive in Christ. And He does this without fail in every single person He justified by faith alone!” But, we both know, that’s not what the man said. He yelled, “You don’t get into heaven *by* faith alone,” which is to say, “You don’t get into heaven by the blood and righteousness of Christ alone.” And therein lies the problem.

Genesis and History

Posted on by
Reply

Article by Director Thomas Purifoy Jr.: Six Reasons Reformed Christians Should Embrace Six-Day Creation (original source here)

When ‘Is Genesis History?’ opened in theaters last year, we had no idea it would be the top-grossing Christian documentary for 2017. We were even more surprised when our distributor said it was bringing it back to theaters on Feb 22, 2018, for an Anniversary Event.

Why did this film resonate so much with audiences? Perhaps it demonstrated that it’s intellectually reasonable for Christians to embrace 6-day creation.

By ‘6-day creation,’ I’m referring not just to one’s view of Genesis 1, but to an entire chronology of historical events. These include the immediate creation of everything in six normal days, a Fall that brought corruption and death into the universe, and a global Flood that destroyed the world. I recognize that among some Reformed Christians this is not a popular view of history. Instead, some have adopted the framework hypothesis, analogical days, or the cosmic-temple model to interpret Genesis 1.

They then accept the conventional chronology of universal history. This includes the slow formation of everything over billions of years starting with a Big Bang, the corruption, and death of trillions of creatures before the arrival of Adam and Eve, a Fall that introduced death only to mankind, and a local flood during the days of Noah.

I realize that intelligent and godly Reformed Christians hold to this model of Earth history. Nevertheless, many seem unaware of the actual events they must inevitably adopt when affirming a 13.8 billion-year-old universe. After all, one cannot extend history for billions of years without attaching new events to it. Those events have theological consequences. This is why Reformed thinkers like Geerhardus Vos, Louis Berkhof, and D. Martin Lloyd-Jones embraced 6-day creation. They understood it is the events included in 6-day creation that are essential for Christian theology.

Here are six theological reasons worth considering:

1. God’s Goodness Must Be Reflected in the Original Creation
Ligon Duncan observed in an interview for ‘The Gospel Coalition’ that affirming the goodness of the original creation is non-negotiable. As the Westminster Confession states, the goodness of the original creation is the manifestation of the glory of God’s own goodness. (WCF 4.1)

What does that goodness look like? It is full of life-giving power and bounty. This is what we see in Genesis 1. God pronounces His original creation ‘good’ and ‘very good.’ It was a world of plenty and beauty without animal carnivory (Gen 1:30) and without corruption and death (Rom 8:21).

Yet this picture of an artistically-designed, beautiful world only fits within the chronology of 6-day creation. If one adopts the conventional chronology, one must accept that the Earth was absent from the universe for its first 9 billion years. After a galactic cooling event, the Earth slowly formed through billions of years of uninhabitable environments. God eventually created the first complex marine life, then progressively created or evolved different types of organisms. These experienced death and massive extinction events that led to the destruction of trillions of living creatures. All this happened long before the appearance of Adam and Eve.

I realize that some Christians may not be interested in these sorts of details. Yet anyone who chooses to accept an old universe implicitly accepts the historical events that go with it. It is a history filled with lifelessness and death, not the goodness of God.

2. Adam’s Sin Resulted in Universal Corruption and Death
According to the conventional chronology, corruption has always been a part of the universe. This can be seen in the fossil record which supposedly represents 540 million years of animal suffering and death. It provides snapshots of a world often full of thorns and thistles. Continue reading →

How to Find the Will of God

Posted on by
Reply

Article by R. C. Sproul: What Is the Will of God for My Life?

This excerpt is taken from the book “Everyone’s a Theologian”.

What does the Bible say about God’s leading? It says that if we acknowledge God in all our ways, He will direct our paths (Prov. 3:5–6). We are encouraged by Scripture to learn the will of God for our lives, and we do so by focusing our attention not on the decretive will of God but on the preceptive will of God. If you want to know God’s will for your life, the Bible tells you: “This is the will of God, your sanctification” (1 Thess. 4:3). So when people wonder whether to take a job in Cleveland or in San Francisco, or whether to marry Jane or Martha, they should study closely the preceptive will of God. They should study the law of God to learn the principles by which they are to live their lives from day to day.

The psalmist writes, “Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers; but his delight is in the law of the Lord, and on his law he meditates day and night” (Ps. 1:1–2). The godly man’s delight is in the preceptive will of God, and one so focused will be like “a tree planted by streams of water that yields its fruit in its season” (v. 3). The ungodly, however, are not like that but “are like chaff that the wind drives away” (v. 4).

If you want to know which job to take, you have to master the principles. As you do, you will discover that it is God’s will that you make a sober analysis of your gifts and talents. Then you are to consider whether a particular job is in keeping with your gifts; if it is not, you should not accept it. In that case, the will of God is that you look for a different job. The will of God is also that you match your vocation—your calling—with a job opportunity, and that requires a lot more work than using a Ouija board. It means applying the law of God to all the various things in life.

When it comes to deciding whom to marry, you look at everything Scripture says with respect to God’s blessing on marriage. Having done that, you might discover that there are several prospects who meet the biblical requirements. So which one do you marry? The answer to that is easy: whichever one you want to marry. As long as the one you choose falls within the parameters of the preceptive will of God, you have complete liberty to act according to whatever pleases you, and you do not need to lose any sleep wondering whether you are outside the hidden or decretive will of God. First, you cannot be outside the decretive will of God. Second, the only way you are going to know the hidden will of God for you today is to wait until tomorrow, and tomorrow will make it clear to you because you can look back on the past and know that whatever happened in the past is the outworking of the hidden will of God. In other words, we only know God’s hidden will after the fact. We usually want to know the will of God in terms of the future, whereas the emphasis in Scripture is on the will of God for us in the present, and that has to do with His commands.

“The secret things” belong to God, not to us. “The secret things” are not our business because they are not our property; they are His. However, God has taken some of the secret plans of His mind and removed the secrecy, and such things do belong to us. He has taken the veil away. This is what we call revelation. A revelation is a disclosure of that which once was hidden.

The knowledge that is ours through revelation properly belongs to God, but God has given it to us. That is what Moses was saying in Deuteronomy 29:29. The secret things belong to God, but that which He has revealed belongs to us, and not only to us but to our children. God has been pleased to reveal certain things to us, and we have the unspeakable blessing of sharing those things with our children and others. The priority of passing that knowledge on to our children is one of the main emphases in Deuteronomy. God’s revealed will is given in and through His preceptive will, and this revelation is given that we might be obedient.

As I said earlier, many people ask me how they can know the will of God for their lives, but rarely does anyone ask me how he can know the law of God. People do not ask because they know how to understand the law of God—they find it in the Bible. They can study the law of God in order to know it. The more difficult question is how we can do the law of God. Some are concerned about that, but not too many. Most people who inquire about the will of God are seeking knowledge of the future, which is closed. If you want to know the will of God in terms of what God authorizes, what God is pleased with, and what God will bless you for, again, the answer is found in His preceptive will, the law, which is clear.

Abiding in Christ

Posted on by
Reply

Article: What Does it Mean to Abide in Christ? by Dr. Sinclair Ferguson (original source here)

The exhortation to “abide” has been frequently misunderstood, as though it were a special, mystical, and indefinable experience. But Jesus makes clear that it actually involves a number of concrete realities.

First, union with our Lord depends on His grace. Of course we are actively and personally united to Christ by faith (John 14:12). But faith itself is rooted in the activity of God. It is the Father who, as the divine Gardener, has grafted us into Christ. It is Christ, by His Word, who has cleansed us to fit us for union with Himself (15:3). All is sovereign, all is of grace.

Second, union with Christ means being obedient to Him. Abiding involves our response to the teaching of Jesus: “If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you …” (John 15:7a). Paul echoes this idea in Colossians 3:16, where he writes, “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly,” a statement closely related to his parallel exhortation in Ephesians 5:18: “be filled with the Spirit.”

In a nutshell, abiding in Christ means allowing His Word to fill our minds, direct our wills, and transform our affections. In other words, our relationship to Christ is intimately connected to what we do with our Bibles! Then, of course, as Christ’s Word dwells in us and the Spirit fills us, we will begin to pray in a way consistent with the will of God and discover the truth of our Lord’s often misapplied promise: “You will ask what you desire, and it shall be done for you” (John 15:7b).

Third, Christ underlines a further principle, “Abide in My love” (15:9), and states very clearly what this implies: the believer rests his or her life on the love of Christ (the love of the One who lays down His life for His friends, v. 13).

This love has been proved to us in the cross of Christ. We must never allow ourselves to drift from daily contemplation of the cross as the irrefutable demonstration of that love, or from dependence on the Spirit who sheds it abroad in our hearts (Rom. 5:5). Furthermore, remaining in Christ’s love comes to very concrete expression: simple obedience rendered to Him is the fruit and evidence of love for Him (John 15:10–14).

Finally, we are called, as part of the abiding process, to submit to the pruning knife of God in the providences by which He cuts away all disloyalty and sometimes all that is unimportant, in order that we might remain in Christ all the more wholeheartedly.

Charles Spurgeon – The Man

Posted on by
Reply

Article by Michael Reeves: 10 Things You Should Know about Charles Spurgeon (original source here)

1. His ministry began in the year of his conversion as a young man.
Spurgeon was raised in a Christian home, but was converted in 1850 at fifteen years old. Caught in a snowstorm, he took refuge in a small Primitive Methodist chapel in Colchester. After about ten minutes, with only twelve to fifteen people present, the preacher fixed his eyes on Spurgeon and spoke to him directly:

“Young man, you look very miserable.” Then, lifting up his hands, he shouted, “Young man, look to Jesus Christ. Look! Look! Look! You have nothin’ to do but to look and live.” Spurgeon later wrote, ‘Oh! I looked until I could almost have looked my eyes away.’ 1

The ‘Prince of Preachers’ was tricked into preaching his first sermon that same year. An older man had asked Spurgeon to go to the little village of Teversham the next evening, “for a young man was to preach there who was not much used to services, and very likely would be glad of company.” It was only the next day that he realized the ‘young man’ was himself.2

2. He was a man of hard work and huge influence.
He went on to preach in person up to thirteen times per week, gathered the largest church of his day, and could make himself heard in a crowd of twenty-three thousand people (without amplification). In print he published some eighteen million words, selling over fifty-six million copies of his sermons in nearly forty languages in his own lifetime.

3. He was self-consciously a theological and doctrinal preacher.
While Spurgeon is not known as a theologian as such, he was nevertheless a deeply theological thinker and his sermons were rich in doctrine, and dripping with knowledge of historical theology – especially the Puritans.

Some preachers seem to be afraid lest their sermons should be too rich in doctrine, and so injure the spiritual digestions of their hearers. The fear is superfluous. . . . This is not a theological age, and therefore it rails at sound doctrinal teaching, on the principle that ignorance despises wisdom. The glorious giants of the Puritan age fed on something better than the whipped creams and pastries which are now so much in vogue.3

4. He was pre-eminently a theologian and preacher of the cross.
Spurgeon’s was a cross-centered and cross-shaped theology, for the cross was “the hour” of Christ’s glorification (John 12:23–24), the place where Christ was and is exalted, the only message able to overturn the hearts of men and women otherwise enslaved to sin. Along with Isaiah 45:22, one of Spurgeon’s favorite Bible verses was John 12:32: “And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.”

He insisted on celebrating the Lord’s Supper every Sunday, and often broke bread during the week as well. He believed his preaching of the crucified Christ was the only reason why such great crowds were drawn to his church for so many years. Continue reading →

Looming Debate Over SSA

Posted on by
Reply

By Rick Phillips (original source here)

These days, it seems that almost every week social media uncovers another eruption along the Presbyterian Church in America’s (PCA) volcanic fault line between social accommodation/compassion and biblical obedience. This week, a conference promoting strategies to address same sex attraction (SSA) has raised heads and provoked comment. This particular event seems to be a laudable attempt to balance the tension: while calling for a compassionate acceptance of SSA Christians it also makes clear statements in support of biblical marriage and takes a position against homosexual behavior that most people in our society would consider fundamentalist. Conservatives should therefore refrain from drawing the worst possible implications from what seems to be a thoughtful and responsible attempt to address this major cultural touchstone.

While avoiding hysterical division, we can at the same time note that a major question mark hangs over the normalization of SSA as a Christian category. It seems that there is a growing consensus in the PCA that we can and must distinguish between one’s sexual orientation and sinful desires. The alternative would seem to be that we tell men and women struggling with homosexuality that what they consider a part of who they are is sinful and (as some would have it) subject them to tortuous rehabilitation techniques that probably include electric shock. The bridge, therefore, between compassion and biblical fidelity is to embrace “gay in Christ” as a normal and wholesome category and then help our LGBTQ brothers and sisters live celibately with these desires.

One problem with this love-motivated strategy is that it collapses under the weight of Scripture. The biblical argument in favor of SSA acceptance goes like this: we always distinguish between desire and temptation. A heterosexual may sinlessly experience an attraction to a member of the opposite sex without giving in to lust. The same must therefore be the case for a homosexual. The orientation is not necessarily sinful, while the desire represents a temptation to be avoided. The key issue is behavior: does the person (heterosexual or homosexual) give in to temptation and commit the sin?

A first criticism of this approach will note that it fails to apply the Bible’s vastly different approach to homosexuality versus heterosexuality, only one of which can ever be sinless. But the major problem is that the Bible does not distinguish between orientation and desire, while instead categorizing desire as temptation. Biblically, temptation is the outward circumstance that prompts desire into sin. But desire for sin itself is an expression of our sinful nature. Bible-believing churches take this approach to virtually every sin other than homosexuality (it is often pointed out that we would never take the pro-SSA approach to racism, for instance). A biblically accurate approach to homosexuality must therefore be congruent with our understanding of sin in general.

One key text is James 1:14-15: “each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death.” Notice that James does not equate desire and temptation but distinguishes them. Desire is the inward disposition toward a given sin. As James sees it, the key issue is not temptation but desire: until desire is sanctified by the grace of Christ, temptation is going to produce sinful behavior. Epithumia, the Greek word translated as “desire” identifies an inward impulse and almost always has a sinful connotation (see Rom. 7:7-8, Gal. 5:17, Col. 3:5, and 1 Thess. 4:5). Therefore, to isolate orientation from sinful desire in simply contrary to Scripture. Continue reading →

Catechism Modification

Posted on by
Reply

Q: What is the fourth commandment?
A: The fourth commandment is, “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant, or your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates. For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.” (Ex. 20:8)

Q: What does the Sabbath signify?
A: The Sabbath was given to the nation of Israel as a remembrance that God gave them rest by bringing them out of slavery in Egypt (Deut. 5:12-15), and as a sign of the Mosaic covenant between God and Israel (Exo. 31:16-17), and as a type and shadow of the rest that has come in salvation through Jesus Christ (Col. 2:16-17) and that will come in the final state (Rev. 21:3-4). Jesus Christ is our Sabbath rest, having given us peace with God (Heb. 4:9-11).

(Eric Bryant)