A Sabbath Remains: The Place of Hebrews 4:9 in the New Testament’s Witness to the Lord’s Day

By Robert P. Martin

Robert P. Martin, Ph.D. is Pastor of Emmanuel Reformed Baptist Church, Seattle, Washington and Editor of Reformed Baptist Theological Review.

In treating the biblical evidence for the perpetuity of the Sabbath under the New Covenant, a comprehensive biblical-theological approach eventually must take notice of Heb. 4:9, where the writer says, “There remaineth therefore a Sabbath rest for the people of God” (ASV).[1] The KJV and NKJV translations of this verse do not use the word “Sabbath,” only the word “rest,” i.e., “There remains therefore a rest for the people of God.” This is unfortunate. The word “rest” appears ten other times in Heb. 3 and 4. In each case, the original word is either κατάπαυσις or the verb equivalent καταπαύω. At 4:9, the writer uses a different word, σαββατισμός. The reader of the KJV or NKJV would never suspect this, because these versions also translate this word as “rest.” Found only here in the New Testament, σαββατισμός (sabbatismos) is derived from the Hebrew word “Sabbath.” The translation “Sabbath rest” (ASV, RSV, NASB, NIV, ESV) at least preserves the word’s distinctiveness. The Bible in Basic English has “a Sabbath-keeping.”[2]

Hebrews 4:9 and the Doctrine of the Christian Sabbath

Before we consider Heb. 4:9 in its larger context, I want to underscore a point respecting the place of this text in the study of the Christian Sabbath. Some see in it only a reference to a heavenly Sabbath.[3] Others believe that it also speaks of an earthly Christian Sabbath day.[4] Only rarely does anyone try to use it to argue against a Christian Sabbath.[5] The most sustainable proposition is that either Heb. 4:9 has nothing to do with the subject of a weekly Sabbath or it supports a Christian Sabbath; but there is nothing in this verse that undermines the idea of a Lord’s Day Sabbath for the Church of Jesus Christ. In other words, this text is either irrelevant or it is the friend of the Christian Sabbath—in no way is it an enemy.

There remaineth therefore a σαββατισμός for the people of God

What then did the writer of Hebrews mean when he wrote, “There remaineth therefore a σαββατισμός for the people of God”? Perhaps the place to begin is with the meaning of σαββατισμός. This word appears only here in the New Testament. Lincoln is correct in saying that “it seems to have been deliberately substituted for κατάπαυσις” (the word for “rest” which, along with καταπαύω, occurs elsewhere in Heb. 3–4).[6] The only place that σαββατισμός occurs in extant writings from the period contemporary to Heb. 4:9 is in Plutarch’s De Superstitione 3 (Moralia, 166A), but this is disputed, leading some to suggest that the writer of Hebrews coined this term himself.[7] Lincoln also says,

There are also four occurrences [of σαββατισμός] in post canonical literature that are independent of Hebrews 4:9. They are Justin, Dial. c. Tryph. 23:3; Epiphanius, Panar. haer. 30:2:2; Martyrium Petri et Pauli cap. 1; Const. Ap. 2:36:2. In each of these places the term denotes the observance or celebration of the Sabbath. This usage corresponds to the Septuagint usage of the cognate verb (cf. Exod. 16:30; Lev. 23:32; 26:34f.; 2 Chron. 36:21), which also has reference to Sabbath observance.[8]

I think that it is of interest that “in each of these places the term [σαββατισμός] denotes the observance or celebration of the Sabbath,” i.e., not “a Sabbath rest” as a state that is entered into but “a Sabbath-keeping” as a practice that is observed. This, of course, corresponds to the word’s morphology, for the suffix -μος indicates an action and not just a state.[9] This at least suggests that if the writer of Hebrews meant only “a Sabbath rest,” i.e., “a Sabbath state” to be entered into, he could have continued to use κατάπαυσις, for he had already established the referent of that word as God’s own Sabbath rest which is to be entered into by faith (cf., 4:1, 3, 4, 11). The word σαββατισμός suggests a Sabbath action, i.e., “a Sabbath-keeping,” although the idea of “a Sabbath state” is not necessarily excluded. As we will see, perhaps this is relevant to the question at hand.

Hebrews 4:9 in Context

The only way, of course, to evaluate properly the place that Heb. 4:9 has in the New Testament’s witness to the Lord’s Day is to examine it in its context, i.e., in light of the writer’s argument in chapters 3 and 4. At 3:1, the writer exhorts us to consider Jesus “the apostle and high priest of our confession.” In chapters 3 and 4, he compares Jesus in the office of apostle with the apostleship of Moses.[10] And his main point is that Jesus, God’s Son and the builder of God’s house, is worthy of more honor than Moses, who was only a servant in God’s house (3:2–6a). The point of this comparison, of course, is the superiority of the word that God spoke through his Son (the New Covenant) to the word that he spoke through his servant Moses (the Old Covenant). What follows this comparison is a warning based on it concerning apostasy (3:6b–4:11). By way of outline:

1. The true members of God’s covenant people are distinguished by their perseverance (3:6b)

2. Beware of imitating the apostasy of the Israelites in the wilderness (3:7–4:11)

a. David’s warning to his generation about the example of the wilderness generation (3:7–11) 

b. Beware an evil heart of unbelief (3:12) 

c. Exhort one another while the “today” of God’s grace continues (3:13) 

d. Beware the deceitfulness of sin, which hardens the heart against the gospel (3:13) 

e. Hold fast your confidence in Christ firm until the end (3:14) 

f. The example of the wilderness generation–they did not enter God’s promised rest because of unbelief (3:15–19) 

g. A promise of entering God’s Sabbath rest remains (4:1–11)

Our concern is 4:1–11. The general train of thought is as follows. The promise of entering God’s rest, which was known to Israel in the wilderness (when Israel was not yet in the land of Canaan), which also remained in David’s day (when Israel occupied the land of Canaan), is still in force under the New Covenant—“a promise being left of entering into his rest” (4:1). As the wilderness generation proved, it is possible to come short of the promised inheritance—“let us fear, therefore, lest haply. .. any one of you should seem to have come short of it” (4:1). “Let us fear,” that is, “for indeed we have had good tidings preached unto us, even as also they” (4:2). As to the wilderness generation, so God also has promised to us an inheritance on condition of persevering faith. But beware, for “the word of hearing did not profit them, because it was not united by faith with them that heard” (4:2). Only those who believed (Joshua and Caleb) entered the promised rest. So also “we who have believed do enter into that rest” (4:3).

Again citing Psa. 95:11—“even as he hath said, As I sware in my wrath, They shall not enter into my rest” (4:3, thus pointing back to what he had already said at 3:7–11), the writer identifies the “rest” promised to those who persevere in faith (the same “rest” promised in David’s day) as the “rest” which God entered when he finished his work of creation, i.e., God’s own Sabbath rest. “For he hath said somewhere of the seventh day on this wise, And God rested on the seventh day from all his works; and in this place again, They shall not enter into my rest”(4:4–5).

Though Israel was already in Canaan, the promise that some might enter into God’s rest remained in David’s day. “Seeing therefore it remaineth that some should enter thereinto, and they to whom the good tidings were before preached failed to enter in because of disobedience, he again defineth a certain day, To-day, saying in David so long a time afterward (even as hath been said before), To-day if ye shall hear his voice, Harden not your hearts” (4:6–7). David set the wilderness generation’s example of apostasy before the people of his generation and, in light of the promise remaining to them of entering God’s rest, he exhorted them not to harden their hearts and not to follow the example of their fathers’ disobedience.

The “rest” which God promised through David was not Canaan, “for if Joshua had given them rest, he would not have spoken (in Psalm 95) afterward of another day” of opportunity to enter into his “rest” (4:8). Joshua gave the people the “rest” of Canaan (cf., Josh. 21:43–45), but he didn’t give them what Canaan symbolized, i.e., the heavenly Sabbath rest which God entered when he finished his work of creation.

The writer then concludes, “There remaineth therefore a Sabbath rest for the people of God” (4:9). What was true in the wilderness, and in David’s day, is still true. A promise being left of entering into God’s own Sabbath rest, let us fear lest any one (in imitation of the unbelief and disobedience of the wilderness generation) come short of it by apostasy.

Hebrews 4:10 and God’s Great Works

Verse 10 contains a statement that is explanatory of verse 9; and its proper interpretation is critical. There remains therefore a Sabbath rest for the people of God, “for (γάρ, because) he that is entered into his rest hath himself also rested from his works, as God did from his.” Who is the “he” in this statement? Citing Rev. 14:13 as a parallel, Philip Hughes says that the text is speaking of Christians: “the labors from which the people of God rest in the heavenly sabbath are the toilings, trials, and tribulations of their present pilgrimage.”[11] John Owen, however, says that the “he” is not the individual Christian but Christ himself. He offers the following reasons for this interpretation.[12]

First, repeatedly throughout the context the writer says that the rest that the believer enters is God’s own rest (cf., 3:11, 18; 4:1, 3, 5). Nowhere else in these chapters does he refer to the believer entering his own rest. Does he now (at 4:10) change this pattern and speak instead of the believer entering his own rest? If he does, it is without precedent in a context where he speaks uniformly of believers entering God’s rest.

Second, throughout these chapters the writer has referred to those whom he is exhorting only in the plural (“we,” “us,” “our,” “ye”). At no point has he used the singular “he” to refer to anyone except God the Father and God the Son. If the writer is still speaking of “the people of God” (4:9), why does he now choose the third person singular “he”? We would expect him to say something like this: “For we who have entered into our rest have ourselves also ceased from our works as God did from his.” If this is what the writer meant, why didn’t he say this? Why switch to the third person singular “he”? Owen’s answer is that he would not naturally have expressed himself this way; therefore, the “he” must refer to someone else mentioned in the context. That person is Christ, so that the writer is saying: “for he (i.e., Christ) that is entered into his rest hath himself also rested from his works, as God did from his.”

Third, Owen argues that the analogy of the verse breaks down, if the “he” refers to the individual Christian.

What are the works that believers should be said here to rest from? Their sins, say some; their labours, sorrows, and sufferings, say others. But how can they be said to rest from these works as God rested from his own? for God so rested from his as to take the greatest delight and satisfaction in them,–to be “refreshed” by them [Exod. 31:17]. .. . Men cannot so rest from them as God did from his; but they cease from them with a detestation of them so far as they are sinful, and joy for their deliverance from them so far as they are sorrowful. This is not to rest as God rested.[13]

The analogy instead is between the finished work of God in creation and the finished work of Christ in redemption. When each finished his work, he entered into his rest–God the Father (on the seventh day of the week) into his Sabbath rest, God the Son (at his resurrection on the first day of the week) into his Sabbath rest.

If 4:10 refers to Christ’s entering into his rest, what then is the Sabbath rest which v. 9 refers to as remaining for the people of God to enter? It is (as throughout the context) the Sabbath rest of God; but it is also the Sabbath rest of the Son, which he entered when he finished his works, which remains to be entered by all who are joint-heirs with him.

But what does this have to do with the Christian Sabbath? Owen says that it has much to do with our Lord’s Day Sabbath under the New Covenant, that in every state of the church. ..

1. There is a distinct work of God which is the foundation of (which establishes) that state of the church.
2. There is a rest which God enters into when he finishes that work.
3. Men also enter God’s rest by faith.
4. There is a day of rest appointed, a reminder of God’s finished work and a pledge of that rest of God which is to be entered into.

God’s first great work is creation. When he finished this work, he rested (sabbathed). Men entered that rest by faith. The day of rest which was appointed, blessed, and hallowed as a reminder and a pledge, and which was to be observed by God’s people, was the seventh day of the week.

God’s second great work was redeeming Israel from Egypt and giving the people Canaan as their inheritance. When God finished this work, he rested, as he says in Psa. 132:13, 14, “The Lord hath chosen Zion; he hath desired it for his habitation. This is my rest for ever: here will I dwell; for I have desired it.” Under the Old Covenant, God’s Sabbath rest remained; and men, even if they dwelt in Canaan (Zion) physically, still had to enter God’s rest by faith. That, of course, was David’s point in Psa. 95. The day of rest (reconfirmed when the Lord entered into this rest) to be observed by God’s people was still the seventh day of the week, which, however, was then not only a reminder of his creation rest but also a sign of the covenant at Sinai (Exod. 31:13, 17). As Owen says,

It is true, this day was the same in order of the days with that before observed, namely, the seventh day of the week; but it was now re-established upon new considerations, and unto new ends and purposes. The time of the change of the day was not yet come, for this work was but preparatory for a greater.[14]

God’s third great work was the work of God the Son redeeming his people from their sins. When Christ finished this work on the first day of the week, he entered into his rest (4:10). Men, as in each previous age, so under the New Covenant, must enter this rest by faith. The day of rest now is changed to the first day of the week as a reminder of Christ’s finished work and as a pledge of our entering into his rest. In other words, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God–not only in terms of a Sabbath rest of Christ (to be entered by God’s people by faith) but an earthly Sabbath day which points to it (to be observed by God’s New Covenant people). Owen says,

The apostle proves, from the words of the psalmist [Psalm 95], that there was yet to be a third state of the church, an especial state under the Messiah, which he now proposed unto the Hebrews, and exhorted them to enter into. And in this church-state there is to be also a peculiar state of rest, distinct from them which went before. To the constitution hereof there are three things required:–First, That there be some signal work of God completed and finished, whereon he enters into his rest. 

This was to be the foundation of his whole new church-state, and of the rest to be obtained therein. Secondly, That there be a spiritual rest ensuing thereon and arising thence, for them that believe to enter into. Thirdly, That there be a new or renewed day of rest, to express that rest of God, and to be a pledge of our entering into it. If any of these, or either of them, be wanting, the whole structure of the apostle’s discourse will be dissolved.[15]

Conclusion

What place does Heb. 4:9 have in the New Testament’s witness to the Lord’s Day? If Owen is correct, then this text is not neutral but a friend in our study of the foundation of the Christian Sabbath, for it bears powerful witness to the Lord’s Day of the New Covenant church. The Lord’s Day, to be observed by God’s New Covenant people in remembrance of the great works of Christ in securing for us an inheritance in his Sabbath rest, is a pledge of our entering that rest and is to be observed by us as a sacred day of Sabbath rest. The Lord’s Day is, where rightly observed, a foretaste of our full inheritance. As we saw earlier, the substitution of σαββατισμός for κατάπαυσις at least suggests that the writer of Hebrews had more than “a Sabbath rest” in mind. The word’s morphology suggests also “a Sabbath-keeping” that remains for the people of God.

Notes

1. Owen says that “this place is touched on by all who have contended about the original and duration of the sabbatical rest, but has not yet, that I know of, been diligently examined by any.” John Owen, Exercitations concerning the Name, Original, Nature, Use, and Continuance of a Day of Sacred Rest, in An Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews, ed., W.H. Goold (reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980), 2:410.
2. So also John Parkhurst, A Greek and English Lexicon to the New Testament (London: W. Faden, n.d.), s.v., σαββατισμός; E. W. Bullinger, A Critical Lexicon and Concordance to the English and Greek New Testament (reprint ed., London: Samuel Bagster and Sons Limited, 1974), s.v., σαββατισμός; A Lexicon Abridged from Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1916), s.v., σαββατισμός; J.H. Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (reprint ed., Wheaton, IL: Evangel Publishing Co., 1974), s.v., σαββατισμός.
3. See, e.g., B.F. Westcott, The Epistle to the Hebrews (reprint ed., Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1980), 98, 99; Philip E. Hughes, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1977), 160–162. Brown says, “The rest here is that state of holy happiness which Christians enjoy on earth as well as in heaven, and into which they enter by the ‘belief of the truth.’” John Brown, Hebrews (reprint ed., Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1961), 208.
4. See, e.g., John Owen, 2:410–22; cf., Ibid., 4:325–31; Chr[istopher] Wordsworth, The New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, in the Original Greek: with Notes (London, Rivingtons, 1859), 3:381; Arthur W. Pink, An Exposition of Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1954), 209–211; Walter J. Chantry, Call the Sabbath a Delight (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1991), 87–96; Joseph A. Pipa, The Lord’s Day (Fearn, Scotland: Christian Focus, 1997), 115–119.
5. See Andrew T. Lincoln, “Sabbath, Rest, and Eschatology in the New Testament,” in From Sabbath to Lord’s Day, ed. D. A. Carson (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1999), 197–220. Henry Alford, who seemed bent on using any text that he could to deny a Christian Sabbath, didn’t seem to know what to do with this text. He says, “Still more alien from the sense and context is it to use this verse, as some have absurdly done, as carrying weight one way or the other in the controversy respecting the obligation of a Sabbath under the Christian dispensation.” And yet he follows this immediately with this statement: “The only indication it [this text] furnishes is negative: viz. That no such term as σαββατισμός could then have been, in the minds of Christians, associated with the keeping of the Lord’s day: otherwise, being already present, it could not be said that it ἀπολείπεται [remains] for the people of God (the well-known designation of Israel the covenant people).” Henry Alford, Alford’s Greek Testament: An Exegetical and Critical Commentary (reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980), 4:81. But this does not follow if, in fact, the Lord’s Day is the New Covenant form of the creation Sabbath, so that in the form of the Lord’s Day, the creation Sabbath “remains” or “continues to exist” (ἀπολείπεται, cf., Heb. 10:26) for God’s New Covenant people.
6. Lincoln, Sabbath, 213.
7. Pipa says, “Some critical editions of Plutarch suggest baptismous in place of sabbatismous. In this section, Plutarch is discussing barbarian superstitious practices, ‘because of superstition, such as smearing with mud, wallowing in filth, Sabbath rests (sabbatismous)(or immersions, baptismous), casting oneself down with face to the ground, disgraceful besieging of the gods, and uncouth prostrations.’. .. Some scholars agree with the emendation, since ‘resting’ or even ‘superstitious ease’ (in Plutarch’s view) cannot fit the context here with the mud packs and hurling to the ground to overcome fears and sleeplessness. In the previous sentence, however, Plutarch says that they ‘sit down on the ground and spend the whole day there.’ The context at least suggests the possibility of the use of sabbatismos, spending a day in religious rest. Pipa, Lord’s Day, 115. See also Owen, 4:325.
8. Lincoln, Sabbath, 213.
9. A.T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1934), 151.
10. In 5:1–10:18 (with application continuing to 12:17), he compares Jesus in the office of high priest with the high priesthood of the Aaronic order.
11. “And I heard the voice from heaven saying, Write, Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from henceforth: yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labors; for their works follow with them” (Rev. 14:13). Hughes, Epistle to the Hebrews, 161, 162.
12. See Owen, 2:417–419.
13. Ibid., 2:417.
14. Ibid., 2:415.
15. Ibid., 2:416. Italics his.