PREVIOUS CHAPTER - NEXT CHAPTER - HELP - FB - TWITTER - GR VIDEOS - GR FORUMS - GR YOUTUBE
( HEBREWS 4:3-10) There has been so much confusion in the minds of commentators, so many conflicting interpretations of Hebrews 4 in the past, that we deem it the more necessary to go slowly, and endeavor to supply full proof of the exposition which we are here advancing. That which appears to have occasioned the most difficulty for many is the statement made at the beginning of verse 3, “For we which have believed do enter into rest,” or, more literally, “for we enter into the rest, who believed.” Having regarded this verse as setting forth a spiritual rest into which believers now enter, they have altogether failed in their understanding of the second part of verse 1. That sinners do enter into rest upon believing is clear from the promise of Christ in Matthew 11:28. That the measure in which this is enjoyed, subsequently, will be determined by the degree and frequency with which faith is kept in exercise, we fully allow. But these things are not the subjects of which Paul is treating here in Hebrews 4.
Considering that Hebrews 4:3 speaks of the believer’s present rest, many expositors have read this into the opening verse of the chapter, and have regarded its admonition as meaning, Let Christians be on their guard lest, through carelessness and backsliding, they “seem to come short” in their experimental enjoyment of Christ’s rest. In other words, they look upon the “rest” of the opening verses of Hebrews 4 as signifying communion with the Lord. They argue that this must be what was in the apostle’s mind, for he was not addressing the unconverted, but “holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling.” With considerable ingenuity they have appealed to the context, the contents of the closing verses of Hebrews 3, as supporting their contention. Those who failed to enter into Canaan (which they consider was a figure of the saints’ present portion) were not heathen, but Israelites, the covenant-people of God. We must therefore expose the error of this interpretation before proceeding farther.
First , we would remind the reader once more that the apostle was not here writing to Gentile Christians, but to Hebrews, whose circumstances and temptations were peculiar, unique. There was a very real and grave danger menacing them, not so much of interrupting their spiritual fellowship with Christ, but of shaking their faith in Him altogether. The temptation confronting them was the total abandonment of their Christian profession, of their faith in Jesus of Nazareth, now exalted at the right hand of God; and returning to Judaism. This fact must be kept in mind as we take up the study of each chapter of this Epistle. To lose sight of it, courts certain disaster in our interpretation.
Second , while it is true that the apostle’s warning in Hebrews 3 is taken from the history of Israel, the covenant people of God, it needs to be borne in mind that in connection with Israel there was an election within an election, a spiritual one within the national. Romans 9:7,8 distinctly affirms, “Neither because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.” Unless this fact be steadily remembered, much misunderstanding and error will ensue. The fact is that Israel as a Nation, in Old Testament times, is not a type of God’s elect in this New Testament dispensation (as so many have wrongly supposed), but a figure of Christendom as a whole. It was only the spiritual remnant, the elect of God within the nation, who foreshadowed His saints of today.
Third , close attention to what is said of the Israelites in Hebrews 3 shows conclusively that they were an illustration not of true Christians out of communion with God, but instead, of nominal professors who were never born again. In proof of this note in Hebrews 3:10 it is said of them, “They do always err in heart;” now though believers err frequently they do not so “always;” then it is added, “they have not known My ways” — could this be said of the spiritual election of God? Surely not. Again, in verse 11, We are told, “So I sware in My wrath, They shall not enter into My rest:” but God is never wrathful with His own children. Further, in verse 17 it is not simply said that “they died” but that their “carcasses fell” in the wilderness, sure proof is such language that they were not children of God, for “precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of His saints” ( <19B615> Psalm 116:15). Finally, the words of the apostle in Hebrews 3:19 admit of no misunderstanding, “So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.” Thus, they were “children in whom is no faith” ( Deuteronomy 32:20).
Now at the beginning of chapter 4 the apostle applies this solemn warning to test the profession of those who were in danger of “departing from the living God.” First he says, “Let us therefore fear.” The “therefore” would have no real force if after referring to unbelievers he should apply their example to warn believers, of the tendency and danger of ceasing to have communion with the Lord; in such a case his illustration would be strained and irrelevant. No, when he says, “Let us therefore fear” he obviously has in mind the danger of an empty profession, and sets them to a testing of their faith, which test is answered by perseverance. “Lest a promise being left us of entering into His rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.” It was not a “rest” of communion into which they had entered but were warned against leaving, or failing to enjoy; but instead, a rest that was promised. What follows clearly defines “His rest” and confirms what we have said above. It has to do with the Gospel, and not with precepts to saints! And the point insisted on is the presence or absence of faith.
The order of thought in Hebrews 4, so far as we discern it, is as follows:
First, there is a searching exhortation made (verse 1) to all who profess to be Christians, that they should work out their salvation with fear and trembling, and that their walk should be such as to give no one the impression that they “seem” to be departing from Christ. This is followed by a solemn warning (verse 2) that, the mere hearing of the Gospel is not enough; to profit us, it must be received by faith. Third, this is followed by the declaration that only believers enter into the rest of God. In the remainder of our passage the Spirit makes further comment on Psalm and shows (by negative inference) what the “rest” of God is, and how that the believer’s entrance into it is yet future. “For we which have believed do enter into rest, as He said, As I have sworn in My wrath, if they should enter into My rest” (verse 3).
The relation of these two clauses the one to the other, is denoted by “as He said,” what follows being a quotation from the 95th Psalm; their connection with the opening words of the verse being that they supply proof of what is there said. As pointed out in the previous article, “For we enter into the rest, who believed,” simply informs us who are privileged to enter God’s rest, namely, Believers. Corroboration of this is now furnished.
Upon the second clause of this verse we cannot do better than quote from Dr. Gouge: “These words ‘as He said’ may have a double reference. One immediate, to the words next before. Considered thus, they furnish a proof by the rule of contraries. The force of the argument resteth on that ruled case, which the apostle taketh for granted, verse 6, namely, that ‘some must enter’ into that rest which God hath promised. Hereupon this argument may be made: If some ‘must enter,’ then believers or unbelievers: But not unbelievers, for God by oath hath protested against them; Therefore believers shall enter.” “The other reference is more remote to the latter part of the former verse. If the first clause of verse 3 be included in a parenthesis, the reference of this unto the former verse will appear to be the more fit. For it showeth unbelievers reap no benefit by the word of promise, because God hath sworn that such shall not enter His rest.
Upon the words here quoted from the Psalm, Dr. J. Brown said, “According to the Hebrew idiomatical elliptical mode of expressing an oath, ‘they shall not enter into My rest’.” “Although the works were finished from the foundation of the world” (verse 3).
It is at this point the real difficulty of our passage begins, due in part to its peculiar grammatical structure. “The passage that follows wears a peculiarly disjointed appearance, and has occasioned perplexity to interpreters. I apprehend that the last clause of the 3rd verse should be disconnected from the words immediately preceding, and should be connected with those which immediately follow. Along with the 4th and 5th verses, it appears to be a kind of explanatory note on the expression, ‘the rest of God’.” With this explanation the writer is in full accord, indeed, it seems to him impossible to see in the passage any connected sense unless it be taken thus. Continuing to quote from Dr. Brown: “A promise is left us of entering into His rest. The ‘rest’ of God, in its primary use in the Old Testament scriptures, is descriptive of that state of cessation from the exercise of creating energy, and of satisfaction in what He hath created, into which God is represented as entering on the completion of His six days’ work, when in the beginning ‘He formed the heavens and the earth, and all their hosts.’ In this sense the phrase was plainly not applicable to the subject which the apostle is discussing; but in these words he shows that the phrase, the rest of God is not in the scriptures so appropriated to the rest of God after the creation as not to be applicable, and indeed applied, to other subjects. “Verses 4, 5. Although the works were finished from the foundation of the world (for He spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, ‘And God did rest the seventh day from all His works’), yet in this place again, ‘If they shall enter into My rest.’ In this way the three apparently disjointed members are formed into one sentence; and that one sentence expresses a sentiment calculated to throw light on the language which the apostle has employed.” “Although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.”
This sentence is introductory to what immediately follows, in which the apostle, step by step, leads the Hebrews to the consideration of an higher and better rest than ever was enjoyed in this world. There were two “rests” frequently mentioned in the Old Testament as special pledges of God’s favor: the Sabbath and the land of Canaan: the former being styled “the Sabbath of rest to the Lord” ( Exodus 35:2), and “the Sabbath of the Lord” ( Exodus 20:10); the latter, “the rest which the Lord gave them” ( Deuteronomy 12:9; Joshua 1:15). In view of these the Hebrews might well say, We have always enjoyed the Lord’s Sabbath, and our fathers have long occupied Canaan, why then do you speak so much about entering into God’s rest? The verses which follow meet this objection, showing that neither of those “rests” was meant by David in Psalm 95, nor by himself here in Hebrews 4.
The “rest” to which the apostle was pointing the Hebrews was so blessed, so important, so far surpassing anything that Judaism had known, that he was the more careful they should not be mistaken in connection with its nature and character.
First , he clears the way for a definition of it by pointing out what it does not consist of. He begins with the Sabbath which is the first “rest” mentioned in Scripture.
Second , he passes on to the rest of Canaan. The rest of the Sabbath did foreshadow the heavenly rest, and Canaan was, in an important sense, a figure of it too; but Paul would turn them from types and shadows to contemplate and have them press forward to the antitype and substance itself.
This reference to “the works” being “finished from the foundation of the world” takes us back to Genesis 2:1,2. It is the works of creation and restoration, detailed in Genesis 1. The word “foundation” here carries with it a double thought: stability and beginning. As pointed out in our remarks upon Hebrews 1:10, “foundation” denotes the fixity of that which is reared upon it: it is the lowest part of an edifice, upon which the whole of the structure rests. As the “foundation” is the first thing attended to in connection with a building, so this term is used here to denote the beginning of this present world system. “For He spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all His works” (verse 4).
God’s rest on that primitive seventh day possesses at least a fourfold significance.
First , it denoted His own complacency, His satisfaction in what He had made: “And God saw everything that He had made and, behold, it was very good.” Second , it was the Creator setting before His creatures an example for them to follow. Why had God taken “six days” to make what is described in Genesis 1? Had He so pleased, all could have been done in one day, yea, in a moment! Obviously it was for the purpose of teaching us. Just as the great God employed in works of usefulness, in providing for the temporal necessities of His creatures, so should we be. And just as God has ceased from all the works of those six days and on the seventh day “rested,” so must we.
Third , that primitive Sabbath was the prophetic pledge of the “rest” which this earth shall enjoy during the reign of Christ. Fourth, it was a foreshadowing and earnest of the eternal Sabbath, when God shall “rest in His love” ( Zephaniah 3:17).
Perhaps it needs to be added that the words “and God did rest” do not signify, absolutely, that He remained in a state of inactivity. The “rest” of Scripture is never a condition of inertia. The words of our Savior in John 5:17 respecting the Sabbath day, “My Father worketh hitherto” in nowise conflict with Genesis 2:3. God’s “rest” there was from creating new kinds of creatures; what Christ speaks of is His work in doing good to His creatures; it concerns God’s providences, which never cease day or night, preserving, succoring, governing His creatures. From this we learn that our keeping of the Sabbath is not to consist of a state of idleness, but is forebearing from all the ordinary works of the preceding six days. The Savior’s own example in the Gospels teaches us that works of absolute necessity are permissible, and works of mercy proper. Isaiah 58:13, informs us how the Sabbath is to be kept. John 5:17 linked to Genesis 2:3 also contains a hint of the eternal “rest” of heaven: it will be a ceasing from all the carnal works in which we were engaged here, yet it will not be a state of idleness as Revelation 22:3 proves. “And in this again, If they shall enter into My rest” (verse 5). The line of argument which the apostle is here pursuing will the more readily be perceived if due attention be paid to the word “again”. He is proving that there was another “rest” of God beside that which followed upon His works of creation. This is evident from the language of Psalm 95, upon which he comments in the next verse. Thus the Holy Spirit warns us that each expression used in Holy Writ must be interpreted strictly in harmony with its context. A great deal of unnecessary confusion had been avoided if expositors heeded this simple but fundamental rule. Take the oft-quoted words of James 5:16, “The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man available much.” How often the “righteous man” here is regarded as synonymous with “Christian,” one who is “righteous” in Christ. But such a view ignores the context. This statement is found not in Romans, but James. The epistle of James does not give us the believer’s standing, so much as his state. The prayers of a Christian whose ways are not “right” before God, “avail” little or nothing. So all through the book of Proverbs the “righteous” man is not regarded there as one who is righteous imputatively, but practically.
Take again the believer’s present experimental “rest.” There are numbers of passages in the New Testament where the same word “rest” is found, but they by no means all refer to the same thing or experience. Each reference needs to be studied in the light of its immediate context, in the light of the particular book in which it is found, (remembering the special theme of that book), and in connection with what is predicated of that “rest”. “Come unto Me, all ye that labor and are heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you, and learn of Me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls” ( Matthew 11:28,29).
Here it is obvious, almost at first glance, that two distinct “rests” are before us. The first may be designated rest of conscience, which the convicted sinner, groaning beneath the intolerable load of his conscious sins, obtains when he casts himself on the mercy of Christ. The second is rest of soul, which alas, many professing Christians know very little, if anything, about. It is obtained by taking Christ’s “yoke” upon us and “learning” of Him. “Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief” (verse 6).
The first words give intimation of an inference being drawn from what has gone before. In verse 5, God’s protestation against unbelievers is recorded, here the apostle infers therefrom that there is a rest for believers to enter into. Since God has made promise of some entering into His rest, then they must do so: if no unbelievers, then believers. The words, “it remaineth” here signify “it followeth,” for no word of God can fall to the ground. No promise of His can be utterly made void. Though many reap no good thereby, yet others shall be made partakers of the benefit of it. Though the vast majority of the adult Israelites perished in the wilderness, yet Caleb and Joshua entered Canaan. “And they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief.” The word “preached” here means “evangelize.” The same root word is rendered “gospel” in verse 2. This shows us, First , that God has employed only one instrument in the saving of sinners from the beginning, namely, the preaching of the gospel, cf. Galatians 3:8.
Third , that “unbelief” shuts out from God’s favor and blessing. In Hebrews 11:31 we are told, “By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with them that believed not.” It was not because the others were Canaanites, heathen, wicked people, but because they believed not that they “perished.” Solemn warning was this for the Hebrews whose faith was waning. “Again, He limiteth a certain day, saying in David, Today” (verse 7). It is evident that Hebrews 5:6 is an incomplete sentence, finished, we apprehend, in Hebrews 5:11. What follows in verses 7-10 is a parenthesis, and to its consideration we must now turn. The purpose of this parenthesis is to establish the principle on which the exhortation is based, namely, that since there is a “rest of God” for believers to enter, and seeing that Israel of old failed to enter therein, it behooves us today to give the more earnest heed to the word of the Gospel which we have heard, and to “labor to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.” “Again He limiteth a certain day, saying, in David, Today, after so long a time, as it is said, Today if ye will hear His voice, harden not your hearts” (verse 7).
This may be called the text which the apostle goes on to expound and apply. The Revised Version rendering of it is much to be preferred: “He again defineth a certain day, Today, saying in David, so long a time afterward (even as hath been said before), Today if ye will hear” etc.
Having drawn an argument from Psalm 95:11 to show that the promise of rest which is “left” (verse 1) Christians, is not the same as that mentioned in Genesis 2:3, the apostle now proceeds to point out that there is another “rest” to be sought after than the land of Canaan — let us not deem the demonstration of this needless, lest we be found impugning the wisdom of the Holy Spirit.
The apostle’s argument here turns on the word “Today” found in Psalm 95:7. This was what was “limited” or “defined.” The “after so long a time” refers to the interval which elapsed after the Israelites perished in the wilderness and the writing of that Psalm, which contained a Divine exhortation for God’s people living then. Betwixt Moses and David was a period of five centuries ( Acts 13:20). “The apostle’s argument may thus be framed: That rest wherewith men are invited to enter four hundred and fifty years after a rest possessed, is another rest than that which Israel possessed. But the rest intended by David is a rest wherein he inviteth men to enter four hundred and fifty years after Canaan was possessed. Therefore Canaan is not that rest” (Dr. Gouge). “For if Joshua had given them rest, then would He not afterward have spoken of another day” (verse 8).
It is plain that the apostle is here anticipating a Jewish objection, which may be stated thus: Though many of the Israelites which were in the wilderness entered not into Canaan, yet others did; for Joshua conducted their children thither. To obviate this, the apostle proves that the Old Testament Scriptures spoke of another “rest” besides that. He does not deny Canaan to be a rest, but he denies that it was the only rest, the rest to be so rested in as no other was to be sought after. The “then would he have not afterward have spoken of another day” is the proof that Joshua did not settle God’s people in the “rest” which David mentioned.
It is right here that we may discern the point to which the apostle would direct the Hebrews’ attention, though to spare their feelings he does not state it explicitly. It was a glorious thing when Joshua led Israel’s hosts out of the wilderness, across the Jordan, into the promised land. Truly that was one of the outstanding epochs in their national history. Nor would the apostle, directly, deprecate it. Yet if the Hebrews would but meditate for a moment on the nature of that rest into which the illustrious successor of Moses led their fathers, they must see that it was very far from being the perfect state. It was only an earthly inheritance. It was filled with enemies, who had to be dispossessed. Its continued tenure was dependent on their own faithfulness to God. It was enjoyed comparatively only a short time.
Different far is the rest of God into which the Apostle of Christianity will yet lead His people. Listen to His own words, “In My Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto Myself; that, where I am, there ye may be also” ( John 14:2,3).
Here, then, we may see the superiority of Christ over Joshua, as the rest into which He brings His people excels that into which Joshua conducted Israel. “There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God” (verse 9). This verse gives the conclusion drawn from the preceding argument. The apostle had shown that the “rest” mentioned by David was neither the rest of the primitive Sabbath in Genesis 2 nor the rest of Canaan into which Joshua had conducted the second generation of Israel. Therefore there “remaineth a rest to the people of God:” that is, there is some other rest for God’s people to look forward to. Thus, the “therefore” here is, first of all, a general inference drawn from all that precedes. A “promise is left” of entering into God’s rest (verse 1). That promise must be appropriated, “mixed with faith” in those who hear it (verse 2). Only believers will enter that rest, for God hath sworn that unbelievers shall not enter therein (verse 3). Although there is a rest of God mentioned in Genesis 2 (verses 2,3), and although Joshua led Israel into the rest of Canaan (verse 8), yet neither of these “rests” was what is promised Christians (verse 8). Hence, we can only conclude there is another “rest” for God’s people (verse 9).
That the Christian’s perfect “rest” is yet future is clear from the language of verse 11, where the Hebrews were admonished to “labor therefore to enter into that rest.” Thus, regarding verse 9, first, as a general conclusion drawn from the whole of the context, we understand it to mean: “Thus it is evident there is a rest for the people of God.” These words were designed to reassure the hearts of the Hebrews. In turning their backs on Judaism the “rest” of Canaan was relinquished, but this did not mean that they had, because of their faith in Christ, ceased to be “the people of God,” nor did it involve the forfeiture of all privileges and blessings. Nay, the apostle had warned them in Hebrews 3:6,12,14 that it was impossible to retain the privilege of belonging to the people of God except through faith in Christ.
Now he assures them that only for such people was there a rest of God remaining.
Above, we have pointed out that the “therefore” of verse 9 denotes, first of all, that the apostle is here drawing a general conclusion from all he had said in the context. We would now call attention to a more specific inference pointed by that word. It needs to be most carefully observed that in this verse the Holy Spirit employs an entirely different word for “rest” than what he had used in verses 1, 3-5, 8. There the Greek word is rightly rendered “rest,” but here it is “sabbatismos” and its meaning has been properly given by the translators in the margin — “keeping of a Sabbath.”
The Revised Version gives the text itself, “There remaineth therefore a Sabbath rest for the people of God.”
The purpose of the Holy Spirit in employing this term here is not difficult to discover. He was writing to Hebrews, Jews who had professed to become Christians, to have trusted in the Lord Jesus. Their profession of faith involved them in sore trials at the hands of their unbelieving brethren.
They denounced them as apostates from the faith of their fathers. They disowned them as the “people of God.” But as we have said the apostle here reassures them that now only believers in Christ had any title to be numbered among “the people of God.” Having renounced Judaism for Christ the question of the “Sabbath” must also have exercised them deeply.
Here the apostle sets their minds at rest. A suitable point in his epistle had now been reached when this could be brought in: he was speaking of “rest,” so he informs them that under Christianity also, “there remaineth therefore a Sabbath-keeping for the people of God.” The specific reference in the “therefore” is to what he had said in verse 4: God did rest on the seventh day from all His works, there]ore as believers in Christ are the “people of God” they must rest too. “There remaineth therefore a Sabbath-keeping for the people of God.” The reference is not to something future, but to what is present. The Greek verb (in its passive form) is never rendered by any other English equivalent than “remaineth.” It occurs again in Hebrews 10:26. The word “remain” signifies “to be left after others have withdrawn, to continue unchanged.”
Here then is a plain, positive, unequivocal declaration by the Spirit of God: “There remaineth therefore a Sabbath-keeping.” Nothing could be simpler, nothing less ambiguous. The striking thing is that this statement occurs in the very epistle whose theme is the superiority of Christianity over Judaism; written to those addressed as “holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling.” Therefore, it cannot be gainsaid that Hebrews 4:9 refers directly to the Christian Sabbath. Hence we solemnly and emphatically declare that any man who says there is no Christian Sabbath takes direct issue with the New Testament scriptures. “For he that is entered into his rest he also hath ceased from his own works, as God from His” (verse 10).
In this verse the apostle expressly defines the nature of that excellent rest of which he had been speaking: it is a cessation from our works, as God from His. The object in thus describing our rest is to show that it is not to be found in this world, but is reserved for the world to come. The argument of this verse — its opening “for” denotes that further proof is being supplied to confirm what has been said — is taken from the selfevident principle that rest is not enjoyed till work is ceased from. This world is full of toil, travail and trouble, but in the world to come there is full freedom from all these. “Thy commandment is exceedingly broad” ( <19B996> Psalm 119:96).
There is a breadth and fullness to the words of God which no single interpretation can exhaust. Just as verse 9 has at least a double application, containing both a general conclusion from the whole preceding argument, and also a specific inference from what is said in verse 4, so is it here. Not only does verse 9 state a general principle which serves to corroborate the apostle’s inference in verse 9, but it also has a specific reference and application. The change in number of the pronoun here is not without meaning. In verse 1 he had used a plural, “us,” so in verse 3 “we,” and again in verse 11 he uses “us,” but here in verse 10 it is “he and his.” “It appears to me that it is the rest of Christ from His works, which is compared with the rest of God from His works in creation.” (Dr.
The reference to Christ in verse 10 (remember the section begins at Hebrews 3:1 and concludes with Hebrews 4:14-16) completes the positive side of the apostle’s proof of His superiority over Joshua. In verse 8 he had pointed out that Joshua did not lead Israel into the perfect rest of God; now he affirms that Christ, our Apostle, has entered it, and His entrance is the pledge and proof that His people shall — “whither the Forerunner is for us entered” ( Hebrews 6:20). But more: what is said of Christ in verse 10 clinches our interpretation of verse 9 and gives beautiful completeness to what is there said: “There remaineth therefore a Sabbath-keeping to the people of God. For He that is entered into His rest, He also hath ceased from his own works, as God from His.”
Thus, the Holy Spirit here teaches us to view Christ’s rest from his work of Redemption as parallel with God’s work in creation. They are spoken of as parallel in this respect: the relation which each “work” has to the keeping of a Sabbath! The opening “for” of verse 10 shows that what follows furnishes a reason why God’s people, now, must keep the Sabbath. That reason invests the Sabbath with a fuller meaning than it had in Old Testament times. It is now not only a memorial of God’s work of creation, and a recognition of the Creator as our Proprietor, but it is also an emblem of the rest which Christ entered as an eternal memorial of His finished work; and inasmuch as Christ ended His work and entered upon His “rest” by rising again on the first day of the week, we are thereby notified that the Christian’s six work-days must run from Monday to Saturday, and that his Sabbath must be observed on Sunday. This is confirmed by the additional fact that the New Testament shows that after the crucifixion of Christ the first day of the week was the one set apart for Divine worship. May the Lord bless what has been before us.