Saturday-Night Worship and the Sabbath Command
Jul 16th, 2007 by Nathan White
While we continue to examine the issue of the Sabbath commandment, I believe today’s topic is one which might help illustrate the relevance of the Sabbath command for the New Covenant Christian. (Part 1, P2, and P3 of the Sabbath posts).
There has been an interesting trend in today’s seeker-sensitive churches: Friday and Saturday night worship services. Not surprisingly, this trend has been picking up steam in recent years. Specifically, it seems to be becoming very prevalent in the churches labeled ‘seeker-sensitive’.
From my perspective, and one that is obviously coming from the outside, the change in worship from Sunday to Fri/Sat appears to be motivated by a desire for greater ‘customer satisfaction’. That is, I have seen Fri/Sat night worship generally defended as freeing up more time for the attendees. These churches, usually wanting to accommodate the culture as much as possible, and wanting to appeal to the rebellious side of this generation by breaking the Sunday tradition, advertise Fri/Sat night worship as an ‘alternative’ to traditional Sunday worship which might even free up your entire Sunday in order to get other pressing things/leisure time taken care of.
Today I’d simply like to consider whether or not changing worship from Sunday to Friday or Saturday is appropriate for the New Testament church. To be more specific: is there anything inherently wrong with scrapping Sunday’s in favor of Saturday night? Would this be breaking any kind of commandment of God, or simply a tradition of men? Should we advise against this practice, or embrace this practice?
In addition to this question, one that I believe is directly related to our views concerning the Sabbath Commandment, is there anything inherently wrong/sinful with scrapping weekly worship altogether? Lord-knows this is just around the corner, as in an attempt to accommodate the culture even further, bi-weekly or even monthly worship services are almost certainly going to catch on soon.
Thus, the questions are: Is there anything biblically wrong with Saturday night worship? On what grounds would you defend such services; or, on what grounds would you argue against such services? Should we dismiss it as harmless, or exhort others to examine the scriptures more carefully?
Secondly: Is there anything biblically wrong with bi-weekly or monthly worship services? If a church were to scrap the weekly meetings for convenience and culture-accommodation sake, on what grounds would you agree or disagree with this decision? Is there anything in scripture (other than example) that teaches us that weekly services are mandated?
So today I’d just like to ponder these questions, as I will not directly present an argument for my position. Obviously, as I have already made it clear that I believe the 4th Commandment has an application for the church today, I would point to the Sabbath Command as the foundational stone in which to deal with both positions above. However, I have received a good bit of feedback from friends who disagree with me on this issue, and so I am curious to see how they would defend the weekly, Sunday gathering of the brethren, or if they would even defend that at all. Seems to me that if we are to go by tradition, our arguments might quickly reveal that we are ‘high and dry’.
Nathan,
“Seems to me that if we are to go by tradition, our arguments might quickly reveal that we are ‘high and dry’.”
I suspect you are right, just like worship if we move away from firm Biblical principles as our foundation for all of life and depend instead on our judgement, pragmatics, opinion, or tradition, then what is to stop A.N. Other building on a related but very different foundation?
I look forward to hearing your arguments.
Questions #1 “Is there anything biblically wrong with Saturday night worship?”
I would answer “no.” I don’t think there is anything intrinsically sinful with having a Saturday night service instead of Sunday. However, I think it would be better to follow the apostolic tradition and meet on Sunday. Needless to say, if people are meeting on Saturday night just so that they don’t have to spend as much time worshipping God, then there’s definitely a problem with meeting on Saturday night.
Question: Would it be wrong just to meet on Saturday morning? If not, would would be the difference between this and Sunday morniing? Would it be wrong to meet only on Sunday night? It seems highly probable, though not absolute, that this is what the apostles may have done. In Acts 20:7, Paul continued his speech until midnight. Obviously, this means that the service could not have started until evening.
Question #2: Is there anything biblically wrong with bi-weekly or monthly worship services?”
I would again, answer “no.” I don’t think it is inherently sinful to hold services every other week or even once a month. I think this would be very unwise, and probably a sign of a serious spiritual problem. I say that for the following reasons:
1. Assemblying with God’s people should be a privilege and joy. We should do it as much as we can!
2. Assemblying with God’s people is the only way to be exposed God’s ordained means of grace (puclic reading, preaching, prayer, Lord’s supper, etc. Without these, a Christian cannot be complete.
Case scenario: It is impossible for some Christians to meet every week because of persecution. Some Christians who live in places that are hostile to Christianity can only meet sporadically, and I don’t think anybody would find fault with this.
Davide,
I would put forth to you that Acts 20 is speaking of a Saturday night meeting, since the first day of the week begins at sundown on Saturday. There is actually a traditional gathering at teh close of the Jewish Sabbath called Havdalah. The tradition goes back well before this time, so it is entirely possible that this night meeting happened on a Saturday night.
I would agree that a change of day or frequency for reasons of having to worship less are most likely signs of a weak believer. I would also state that it would be just as wrong to attend a shorter Sunday service for this same reason.
As for a technical question, Nathan I have been searching for the plugins that you are using for your comments. I like the captcha plugin you have, the preview and the formatting buttons. You can edit this comment to excluded this question if you like, but please respond to me and let me know. I really like the look and feel and would like to use them as well on my site. Thanks.
Davide,
I must say that some of your answers surprised me.
Regarding Saturday worship: I know your position on the Sabbath demands that you have no preference in the matter, but you slightly appeal to the ‘tradition’ of the apostles as ‘better’. Thus, how can we say ‘better’ if tradition is simply a preference? Isn’t that setting standards that scripture doesn’t set? If tradition is tradition, and we can break it and not sin, then we should certainly refrain from saying that it’s ‘better’ because that would essentially be legalism (setting our own standards of the sanctified life). That’s like saying” “it’s ‘better’ that we baptize regenerate people instead of infants, because that is the example we see in scripture”.
Regarding Paul and Acts 20: remember that the Jewish calendar went sundown to sundown, thus the first day begins at sundown Saturday, and midnight would probably be 8 or 9 o’clock, as soon as it got dark.
You said: I don’t think it is inherently sinful to hold services every other week or even once a month. I think this would be very unwise, and probably a sign of a serious spiritual problem.
Again, how dare we say something is ‘unwise’ and ‘a sign of a serious spiritual problem’ if we stop short of calling it a sin? That’s like the local legalist who thinks he’s ‘extra-spiritual’ because he attends Wednesday night services, and that whoever doesn’t attend Wednesdays probably has ‘a serious spiritual problem’.
In addition, will you please provide evidence for the fact that the apostles met once a week? How do we know they didn’t meet once a month? I’m curious as to whether you can prove that they met once a week, and if you can, I’m curious as to where you think they got that from. Did they just up and decide once a week was good? Did they disapprove of people who wanted to meet once a month?
Finally, of course the persecuted church wasn’t always able to meet once a week, but God desires mercy instead of sacrifice. In addition, I’m sure that they met every single time they had a chance to get away with it.
I’m just not there. If we reject the Sabbath, then I see no reason why we have to meet on Sunday, and why we have to meet once a week. You say that these are not necessary, but you appeal to tradition to say that they are best. Personally, I see this as an attempt to get around the clear fact that the church has always, by and large, obeyed the Sabbath principle with their actions, even if some continue to deny it with their words. It’s like suppressing the truth in light of so much evidence stacked against you.
Yep….but Nathan you’re not really surprised are you? The logical fact of the matter is that if we neglect a Sunday/Lord’s Day Sabbath as a day of rest from secular labour and positive worship and if reject the notion that it is a part of the creational, moral law, then we have only two options left, we are either completely free of any requirement to worship regularly and have a Sabbath rest, or we must enter into the speculative, legalistic discussion saga that has just been evidenced by Davide.
God does not make mistakes. The only way to prevent a church’s and a people’s liberty of conscience is to maintain the 1st Day, Lord’s Day, Christian Sabbath. Which is ironic given that the most frequent charge against Sabbatrianism is that is itself is legalistic!
Davide,
That maybe came out a bit harsh, I’m not accusing you of being speculative and legalistic as such, rather that the mode of argumentation you’re using is, what I mean is the above sounds like a personal attack, it’s not meant to be!
JP
Question: If Davide’s answer is weakened by his not being able to find weekly meetings in the New Testament, then isn’t the other side weakened in the exact same way?
Question: Why is it illogical for Davide to use terms like “better” or “wiser?” Is it true that the Bible divides all things into exclusive categories of “righteous” and “sinful” and that things must needs fall into one or the other? I think specifically of the issue of alcohol. Many would affirm that it is not Biblical to call all drinking a sin, and yet would also say they believe it is the wiser choice (at least in their own life) to abstain completely. Whether or not the weekly Sabbath is included in the discussion in Romans 14, it is pretty clear from that passage that there are things that are rather indifferent to the larger scheme of kingdom righteousness.
Question: If the eternal Sabbath command is six days of work then a day of rest, then would you affirm that it is sinful for a man to get Saturday and Sunday both as their “weekend” from work? Wouldn’t it be sinful to not work on one of the six? Where would vacations fit into this, if at all? The command is clearly six days of work. Travel and recreation are not work. It says, “Six days you shall work.” I’m not trying to be contentious; but merely wondering how far you’re willing to take this: you’ve already said (arbitrarily) you’re not willing to follow the Bible’s rules for Sabbath enforcement, so it seems to me that you’ve adopted a pick-and-choose hermeneutic here, as to which specific portions of the Fourth and its attending commands you’re going to say are eternal. The jubilee laws are also pretty clearly derived and based on the Sabbath concept. What of those? What is your specific Biblcal warrant for discarding them, if you do?
Thank you, Gordan:)
On the same lines, we are never commanded to read the Word every day, but if someone were to only read their Bible once a month, wouldn’t we say that it would be very unwise, and probably be a sign of an underlying spiritual problem?
Very well said about the “pick-and-choose hermeneutic.” This is where I believe Sabbatarians are so inconsistent.
Gordan said: If Davide’s answer is weakened by his not being able to find weekly meetings in the New Testament, then isn’t the other side weakened in the exact same way?
Is this a serious question, or did you completely jump over the 4th commandment, the creation account, etc., not to mention Luke 23:56, where the disciples rested on the Sabbath, “according to the commandment”? It is hard to take your comments seriously when you ask questions like this.
Gordan said: Why is it illogical for Davide to use terms like “better” or “wiser?” Is it true that the Bible divides all things into exclusive categories of “righteous” and “sinful” and that things must needs fall into one or the other?
Tell that to Nadab and Abihu. Tell that to Cain. Tell that to the next person that objects to you (inconsistently since you deny the perpetuity of God’s law) holding to the regulative principle of worship. The essence of the Sabbath command is worship. When you start playing around with worship and allowing this or saying its ‘wiser’ with that, then, well, you’re playing with fire.
Gordan said: If the eternal Sabbath command is six days of work then a day of rest, then would you affirm that it is sinful for a man to get Saturday and Sunday both as their “weekend” from work?
Gordan, you again, just like Davide, show how ignorant you are of the teaching of scripture on the Sabbath command. You look at this command so rigidly, and in a way you would never look at others. Please, re-read Jesus’ teaching on the Sabbath. Read how the prophets spoke of the Sabbath. To think that it was given to restrict us into some kind of pattern, etc., is to miss the point entirely. Mercy over sacrifice. For man’s good instead of a burden for his shoulders, etc. Point being: you still think the Sabbath is rooted in physical rest, and this question, frankly, is ridiculous, and is based upon your own presuppositions instead of what I have written in my posts.
Gordan said: you’ve already said (arbitrarily) you’re not willing to follow the Bible’s rules for Sabbath enforcement, so it seems to me that you’ve adopted a pick-and-choose hermeneutic here, as to which specific portions of the Fourth and its attending commands you’re going to say are eternal.
I’m not willing to look to the LAW alone for teaching on the Sabbath, anymore that I am willing to look to the LAW alone for teaching on adultery. The fact is, whether you like it or not, Jesus proclaimed Himself ‘Lord of the Sabbath’ (‘Lord of an abolishment’ in Gordan’s mind), and He clarified its true meaning. He did the same with adultery. Thus, I look to the whole of scripture: creation, law, New Testament, apostles, just like I do with the rest of the Law. And lastly, I laugh when you say ‘pick and choose’, because of how you hold to 9 commandments so inconsistently. Your so guilty of the same thing you accuse me of, and yet you still take shots at my position. Wow.
Davide said: On the same lines, we are never commanded to read the Word every day, but if someone were to only read their Bible once a month, wouldn’t we say that it would be very unwise, and probably be a sign of an underlying spiritual problem?
Davide, just how much do I have to read my Bible for me to not be ‘unwise’? Once a day; once a week? Do you not see your own legalism in trying to answer that question? The same goes for worship. If you try and tell me I have to show up for church ‘X’ amount of times a year in order to be ‘wise’ in your eyes, and fail to demonstrate this position biblically (which I’ve asked you to do), then I’d certainly think your crazy and have completely missed the proper function of God’s law.
Davide said: Very well said about the “pick-and-choose hermeneutic.” This is where I believe Sabbatarians are so inconsistent.
Davide, see my line to Gordan where I said: I laugh when you say ‘pick and choose’, because of how you hold to 9 commandments so inconsistently. Your so guilty of the same thing you accuse me of, and yet you still take shots at my position. Wow.
You try and tell me that I DON’T have to hold to the 4th, but the other 9 are binding, and again, I’m never going to take you seriously. Take them all or drop them all, and then maybe I will take your arguments seriously.
Lastly, guys, I appreciate your interaction, but unless you can show me one good (biblical) reason why I should care to go to church more than a couple of times a year, then my point has been made and its time to move on.
Actions, by the church faithfully attending weekly, Sunday worship for the last 2000years, speak much louder than your words. Explain WHY the church has done this for so long, from scripture, and then we’ll talk.
I apologize, Nathan. Didn’t mean to get on your nerves. But, just to make one small point: the fact that you don’t find my arguments enough to persuade you does not mean they are automatically unworthy of consideration. Much less does it mean they are less biblically informed than your own. I don’t demand that you jump over to my side, but I have not questioned your desire to obey God and can readily admit that you have a Bible-based case to present. I admit that you may in fact be correct. But I could be, too. (And you know I’ve got some historical heavyweights on my side who would agree with that assessment.) I suggest you have been inconsistent and arbitrary in some of your interpretations (as, I think, we all are in subtle ways, at various points in our theology.) I wouldn’t dare call you an antinomian, though: to me, that is a charge that is only a half-step removed from Heresy. But I think that has been your constant insinuation against those who disagree with you on this one point, regardless of the lengths they/I go to in an effort to show otherwise. Call me inconsistent. I may well be, although I don’t see it here. But some charges are more grave than others, is all I’m saying. I’d think you could argue this with a bit more charity, especially toward those who have stood shoulder-to-shoulder with you on more pressing issues (thinking of Davide here.) Again, as always, I sincerely appreciate you, my brother, and your passion for God’s truth. May your tribe increase! SDG
Well I’ve seen it all, those who hold to the Sabbath are being “almost” charged with antinomianism by those who don’t. Leaving aside the issue of the necessity of heart obedience and mere external conformity to the law for a few seconds…..let me say that that is the most bizarre thing I have read in a long time.
Gordan,
This is not a personal attack, but if you, as you seem to do, only accept 9 of the 10 commandments then let’s be clear, historically and theologically you are an antinomian.
Nathan,
All this is the perfect illustration of what I wrote in my previous post; if we leave aside the clear teaching of Scripture we end up discussing whether we should be working of a Saturday or not to keep the Sabbath.
Probably time to move to a new subject…….
JP
JP,
I think you misunderstand me on several counts.
1. I specifically said I wasn’t calling anybody an antinomian, and that I thought it would be wrong to do so.
2. I believe in keeping all ten of the Ten Words. The issue at hand is, what does New Testament obedience to the Fourth look like. I’m not advocating 9 out of 10.
3. Maybe I’m missing something, but you chide me for disobeying the Fourth and then ridicule the idea of actually doing what it says (working six days) as if that represents the degeneration of theology.
On the antinomian issue again, no one here advocates keeping every law Moses gave in the form in which he gave it. We’d all say some of it has passed away. Nathan has advocated the passing away of some laws that I think are clearly moral in nature (the punishments for things like adultery) which I advocate keeping. On that issue, I’d keep the law while he’d not keep it. But I never called him an antinomian, neither did I imply it. I suspect there are more laws just like that: Nathan would disregard them, while I would advocate keeping them. Generally, my view of the law is “stricter” than his. I’d be for keeping more of it, not less. But because we differ on exactly what it means to keep the Fourth, I’m an anitnomian apparently. Even though he is the one with the looser overall view of law.
Again, I would protest that my view is not keeping 9 out of 10. That is how I have been repeatedly mischaracterized at this blog, but it is not correct. The issue is how to keep it, and we apparently all agree that we aren’t supposed to do what it says. So it baffles me how one side which disregards what it says, gets to call the other side antinomian.
Gordan,
I certainly apologize for my harsh words. Honestly, I figured you and Davide could take it given how you’ve dished it out to me.
I’m not frustrated with you for disagreeing with me, but rather with how many times I am having to repeat myself. It’s like you guys aren’t even reading my arguments, or you’re completely dismissing them, and continually trying to poison the well in regards to this issue.
Case in point: your statement that my position is ‘hurt’ because you believe that weekly worship is not mentioned in the NT completely dismisses the arguments I have previously set forth on the Sabbath and the NT. I didn’t see that as a serious argument, but as you taking a cheap shot at me in hopes that something would stick. Couple that with the fact that we both agree that just because something isn’t repeated in the NT doesn’t mean it isn’t applicable, and I see the question as ridiculous and a cheap shot.
Case in point 2: claiming that I ‘pick and choose’ in my hermeneutic, while you clearly, and inconsistently, pick and choose as well (off of the 10 words no less!), was again seen by me as a cheap shot, and something that warranted a firm response.
You guys are really beating me up on this, as if I’m just stupid or something, but you’re not answering my questions, plain and simple. That is frustrating to me, especially on my own blog site where I have taken the time to write an argument as a main post for all to see.
Case in point of Gordan and Davide not answering my questions: The model of weekly worship.
Davide and I have talked at length about how frustrating it is to see Christians half-committed to their local church these days. Recreation, sports, work (chasing the almighty dollar bill), laziness, etc., have infiltrated the church to the point that, even among solid, reformed churches, many of the members are irregular in their attendance. Because of this, it is easy to look down on them, to get frustrated at them, to even challenge them to attend on a more regular basis. But the fact remains that there is nothing but legalism driving our frustration with this if there is no Sabbath command. This legalism leads to self-righteousness and judgmentalism (something I am all too familiar with given what I have personally experienced recently). Unless, of course, you can show me from scripture why I should care to attend church more than once a month, which you have not yet demonstrated. I can not ‘forsake the brethren’ in other ways, by being there for them throughout the week for example, but there is no reason why I should care about giving up my Sunday, complete with the lake in the summer and football in the winter, if there is no biblical principle instructing me to do so.
Lastly, antinomianism is missing the point. I haven’t even hinted at this in my arguments to you guys. To say that I have accused you of this is completely unwarranted. I have said simply this: you have no basis on which to hold weekly meetings and expect people to care to show up on a regular basis. Thus, in your churches, you’ll probably always deal with people who don’t care to give up their Sundays more than a couple a times a month –and you’ll lack the biblical foundation to call them to be more committed to the weekly meetings.
Nathan, I apologize for all of your “cases in point.” I could’ve found better ways to say what I wanted to say. But I suggest that when you speak of not being read, or of feeling like your arguments are disregarded out-of-hand, that this is true on my side as well. I fear we all have not been real good communicators. (The specific instance I was referring to when saying you insinuated antinomianism was your statement that I “disregard the law.”) To my mind, that is much more serious a charge than simply pointing out what looks like inconsistency in interpretation. You can be inconsistent with godly motives (which I think you are
You can’t be godly and despise the law, though.
I resonate, truthfully, with your concern about how to urge Christians to more faithful worship attendance. But this is not a concern I see ranking very high in any of the epistles. I’d suggest that if you have to urge a person to attend a service of worship, the problem goes much deeper than his view of the Sabbath. I don’t know any truly regenerate people who really need to be urged to gather with others to worship the One who has saved them by grace.
Gordan,
Blogs are oftentimes SO inadequate at communicating the essence of a disagreement. Wow. I hear you there. I could have said things better (and you would have seen so if we had been face to face), and you could have too as well. Thus, we’re both left with that ‘I’m being attacked’ feeling when in reality, we’re just trying to be firm in our points. No harm done.
Looking back, I regret the ‘disregard the law’ statement; it came out ALL wrong, and I didn’t go back and see that until you mentioned it above. Duh, I know what I meant, and that I didn’t mean how it sounded, but I sure worded that one all wrong.
I just want to get down to the nitty-gritty. We’ve already thrown around the tablet stuff, the hermeneutic stuff, etc., and on this post, I just wanted to see if anyone could present a biblical argument for why I shouldn’t skip Sunday-church two or three times a month to go fishing. I felt that wasn’t being dealt with, and I tried to ’squash it’, much firmer than I obviously should have.
Believe it or not, I do appreciate your comments, brother. And hopefully, we can learn from this, and CONTINUE to discuss this specific topic. Let’s just both be a little more careful with how we say things, and both understand that no matter how it sounds, the other person is just trying to defend what they see in scripture, and I think we can have a fruitful discussion. I would hate it, HATE IT, if you dropped off this just because we got a little heated. Let’s learn from it and move on. This is much better than anything we’ve discussed in quite a while
SDG
Nathan, I am truly rejoicing at that last comment. I feel the same way. I truly did not mean to “beat up” you at all.
On to the nitty gritty that you speak of. I’m wondering what your thoughts are on the idea that the pattern of the NT church in Acts and other places gives us the normative pattern we ought to follow. (I mean, meeting together on the Lord’s Day for corporate worship.) This, combined with the admonition to not forsake the assembly of the saints, seems to my eyes a fairly strong argument. Again, my contention is that it is a strong argument for regular, corporate worship; not so strong an argument for a New Sabbath day, but you may not wish to go back to that. I’d combine this with the warning from 1 John that he who loves the Father will love the children begotten of the Father, so that, then, it does point to a spiritual deficiency if one truly feels no desire to gather with the Body of Christ. Additionally, the common metaphors for the church like Body, Vine, Temple, all necessarily imply a unity and closeness of the parts, which is not a strong “once a week” argument, but does speak to the underlying heart-issue about unity and connectedness.
As someone who is sitting on the outside, kind of watching this discussion go on, I want to give praise for the spirit of unity that I see in the last few comments. I think it is very important to remember although there are many different points of view as to what Scripture is saying (certainly me as a Jew know this all to well. There is a saying if you have two Jews, you will have at least 3 different opinions), a very important thing to remember is the commonalities that we share. I think too much pointless arguments goes towards what is said in the verse in I believe is Titus 3:9, about avoiding disputes.
I don’t think anyone here thinks that salvation rides on this subject, yet it is still important. I think we are all trying to best serve God and understand what He wants for our lives and how to best follow him. We certainly want to walk Holy and blameless, so it is good to discuss these things, and I think it is a blessing to see the spirit that has flowed through the last few comments. Sorry to get all syrupy and all, but it was nice to see, and I think it brings glory to God greater than you might think.
Having said that I could get on my soapbox about the seventh day Sabbath, but I think I leave that alone, lest everyone turn their quills (or keyboards) on me.
Blessings to all,
Bryan
Gordan,
Thanks for the kindness and the jumping back into the discussion. Concerning your comment:
You said: I’m wondering what your thoughts are on the idea that the pattern of the NT church in Acts and other places gives us the normative pattern we ought to follow. (I mean, meeting together on the Lord’s Day for corporate worship.) This, combined with the admonition to not forsake the assembly of the saints, seems to my eyes a fairly strong argument. Again, my contention is that it is a strong argument for regular, corporate worship; not so strong an argument for a New Sabbath day, but you may not wish to go back to that.
I believe that the Sabbath principle carries over into the New Testament church, even though the Sabbath system and all it entails, does not carry over. That is, I believe that the 4th commandment, which is identified as being rooted in creation, has a deeper meaning, just like the other commandments, and this meaning is not captured in the ‘letter of the law’ on stone, just like the other commandments, and that this essence is weekly worship.
In other words:
-The first commandment tells us who to worship.
-The second commandment tells us how to/not to worship.
-The third commandment tells us the proper attitude of worship/conduct of those who profess the Lord.
-And the 4th commandment tells us how frequently or when we should worship.
A full post is coming on this soon, with more explanation, but that is the gist of it. But, regarding your comment, I believe that the early church knew that weekly, dedicated worship was the essence of the 4th command, and that it is off of this principle in which the weekly worship was put into place –to give nothing of how I believe that the Lord specifically changed the Sabbath to Sunday by calling it His day (a charge, I know, that you firmly disagree with).
Thus, in summation, believers, just like you and Davide, continue to obey the law written on your hearts, that law which clearly tells your conscience that weekly, dedicated, and corporate worship is a command from God, and just like all of church history, you attend church each Sunday, and probably take off of work at least most of the time.
I think it is inadequate to say that ‘do not forsake the assembly’ and ‘love the brethren’ have anything to do with weekly worship, as if all the assembly agreed to meet every other week, then you wouldn’t be forsaking anything. Plus, there are plenty of ways to attend other services, functions, and just plain ‘be there’ to love on the body while still skipping Sunday morning services so I can get an early start at the lake.
There; that’s my position, and I plan on (hopefully) expounding on it more in a full post.
The day of worship appointed in the NT is designed to draw our attention to the resurrection of Jesus, just as the OT day of worship draws our attention to creation and redemption (Exo. 20:8-11; Deut. 5:14, 15). I have often wondered if there is a connection between the rejection of the fourth commandment in regard to the embrace of evolution. I wonder what will happen to churches that disconnect themselves from the resurrection (and I could add the sending of the Spirit on Pentecost). Will we see congregations that worship on Saturday or Fridays deviate from this vital, weekly remembrance?