"The Rest of God"

[DamianWarS]

I'm reading "The Rest of God" by Mark Buchanan. it's been on the market for a while now and the book itself has been gifted to me twice and I also found it among my kindle collection but I've never gotten past the first chapter. So I thought I would actually try and finish it. Like before, I just finished the introduction/first chapter again and I can already see why I stopped. So far it is full of anecdotes and is more of a love letter of Sabbath than it is a new covenant teaching of the Sabbath.

Here is a quote from the book

"The argument of this book is that we uniquely take up his invitation by keeping Sabbath, both as a day and as an attiude"
(Buchanan, Mark. The Rest of God (p. 18). Thomas Nelson. Kindle Edition)

What is missing in this line is the salvation message innate in the Sabbath. Sabbath is a gift that must be given (as salvation can only be given), it cannot be taken like the animals who are given rest by their master according to the 4th commandment. Oxen have no authority to rest, in order to have rest then must be given rest by their master and this is a salvation metaphor. When we "keep" Sabbath we only can do so superficially because we actually have no authority in the matter and Sabbath must be given to receive it.

Although it is only early in this book and certainly the idea of weekly rest to restore our focus with God is good this quote makes me concerned about the book's direction, Sabbath is the antithesis and answer to the darkness and void of creation and I don't see that in this line. We will see what is to come.

Any comments to this book or my thoughts? This isn't a place for argument, and if you will excuse the pun I will "sabbath" the noise but I will continue to comment on the book as I read it and I encourage you to engage with me but please keep the pettiness to your own threads, if for nothing else to show each other love and respect. Respond as if each loves God and desires to serve him as much as you do, anything else has no place in this thread.

EDIT: this has turned into somewhat of a personal journal/reflection of the book as I read it. I'm fine with that so I will continue in this fashion. If you haven't read the book then you will have to limit your comments to what is brought up in the thread as the context. This isn't a place for debate, I'm fine with showing disagreement so long as you keep to the context in this thread and respect each other.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

In regards to the author, I would never take the words of a man over the Word of God. God in His own Words that He wrote and spoke explains exactly how to keep His Sabbath Exo 20:8-11 and gives us the purpose of the Sabbath in His Word Isaiah 58:13 and tells us who the Sabbath is made for Mar 2:27 Isa 56. The Sabbath should be kept according to the commandment. At least that is how God's people did so in His Word. Luke 23:56. People accept the way God wrote the other 9 commandments but won't accept the Sabbath commandment the way God wrote and spoke, just like He did with the other 9 commandments. People keep wanting to reinvent the 4th commandment, but I don't see this as doing God's will.

Anyway, I did not read the book but found this review interesting from someone who did.

If you listen to the 2021 interview with Canadian Leaders Network, where Jason Ballard (Alpha Canada) wanted to declare Mark to be a guide in Christian mysticism, and to be in one catalog with Ruth Haley Barton and Richard Foster, you could have been affirmed that Jason Ballard made the correct conclusion of those books written 14 years earlier. But Mark clearly distanced himself in this interview from being put into this box and explained how his mother had initially led him into 'Eastern Religions and Mysticism' and how his wife had been his guru and Spiritual Director before a gradual transformation happened.

The book started very well and its writing style and intrinsic motivation of the first chapters to hold the Weekly Sabbath are very convincing. But the quality of the book soon takes a sharp u-turn, almost as if two different authors would have written the book. As soon as The Message Bible (Eugene Peterson, same college where he got his Master from), witchcraft and an obvious tendency to mysticism sneaked in, the book lost its value, from a book to be highly praised for the first chapters, to a book to be warned against.

- He mentions in his book the 'Prayer of Examen', a prayer developed by Jesuits.

- Hints to the book 'The Attentive Life' by Leighton Ford and Richard Foster (Renovare, Catholic Mystic, Contemplative Prayer).

- Positive quotes and stories from books by C.S. Lewis, J.R. Tolkien and Brother Lawrence, all highly problematic teachers.

- Quotes from Henri Nouwen, a Catholic priest and big name in Mysticism / Contemplative Prayer.

- The author mentions several times the act of emptying yourself (Kenosis), without explaining what he means by it. Kenosis is a misapplication of Jesus having temporarily emptied Himself from His divine power. We do not have divine power to be emptied from. To the contrary, we want the Spirit to fill us to prevent demons from filling an unoccupied house (Mat 12:44).

- He also mentions over and over 'silence and solitude', terms commonly used by Avila, Comer, Eldredge, Nouwen, Foster, Peterson, Rohr, Yancey and Willard, all supporters of Catholic Mysticism and Contemplative Prayer.

- The author first discourages people from making others work on the Sabbath, only to later list several examples how he did and would again violate the law by purchasing e.g. after an excursion. Double moral which clearly violates God’s command. He would have done well to show only a little of the courage he showed when going into the waters with his son and to better define the Sabbath without drifting into legalism. He also wrongly stated that the Bible does not provide any specification and e.g. totally missed the New Covenant indication in Acts to not travel extensively on the Sabbath. The book generally misses exegesis, what would be fine if other authors would plow that field. If only. The book does great in encouraging, but this does not last for long if the parameters and reasoning for the obedience are not provided.

- The book suffers a lot of misinterpretations of Bible verses, exaggerations, invented conversations and acts. After 3/4 of the book, it became painful to see the Word of God being twisted over and over again. At this point in life the author was immature in his faith (at least what is visible through his writings) and would have been disqualified for writing Christian books, while being a writer with great skills for secular books. But listening to the initially mentioned interview, I suspect that this definitely changed for good.

- The author encourages other Christians to trespass warning signs and to risk their lives in dangerous waters.

+ The speaker of the audiobook is simply excellent.

More regarding the Weekly Sabbath:

- He totally misses explaining the Extraordinary / Ceremonial Sabbaths. Without this differentiation we cannot grasp the differences between Old Covenant and Moral Law, between what is gone and what is still valid. A missed opportunity to motivate people by showing the much more burdensome parts of obedience that are gone, and making the Weekly Sabbath appear easy in light of what is gone.

- Romans 14 is misinterpreted. In order to believe that this verse is talking about the Weekly Sabbath, we would have to inject it into the text, based on a preconceived belief, rather than getting it from the text itself. The entire chapter 14 of Romans is exclusively related to food and the verse most probably relates to either pagan festivals (the Romans observed 40 days per year !) and/or the Extraordinary Sabbaths (Feasts) that were usually related to the consumption of specific food (lamb, unleavened bread, no yeast, et al.). A Weekly Sabbath has no indications at all on personal food, therefore it is grossly negligent to insert this Sabbath into this verse.

- He leaves the timing of the Weekly Sabbath open to personal interpretation, but does not state why he thinks that God leaves this choice to us. It would have been beautiful to see some boldness here and to show why a Sabbath can only mean from Sunrise Saturday to Sunrise Sunday, and not any man-made tradition.

- The interpretation of 'Lord's Day' in Rev 1:10 is wrong. It simply means in a better translation a 'day pertaining to the Lord', ultimately describing the Sabbath in other words, while John used constantly a different term for 'the first day of the week'.

+ The interpretation of Hebrews is countercultural and indeed great. One of the few people who understand the 3 dimensions (past-, present-, and future) of those verses.

 

[DamianWarS]

Personally I would never take the words of a man over the Word of God. God in His own Words that He wrote and spoke explains exactly how to keep His Sabbath Exo 20:8-11 and gives us the purpose of the Sabbath in His Word Isaiah 58:13 and tells us who the Sabbath is made for Mar 2:27 Isa 56. The Sabbath should be kept according to the commandment. At least that is how God's people did so in His Word. Luke 23:56. People accept the way God wrote the other 9 commandments, but won't accept the Sabbath commandment the God wrote and spoke, just like He did with the other 9 commandments. People keep wanting to re-invent the 4th commandment, but I don't see this as doing God's will.

Anyway, I did not read the book but found this review interesting from someone who did.

If you listen to the 2021 interview with Canadian Leaders Network, where Jason Ballard (Alpha Canada) wanted to declare Mark to be a guide in Christian mysticism, and to be in one catalog with Ruth Haley Barton and Richard Foster, you could have been affirmed that Jason Ballard made the correct conclusion of those books written 14 years earlier. But Mark clearly distanced himself in this interview from being put into this box and explained how his mother had initially led him into 'Eastern Religions and Mysticism' and how his wife had been his guru and Spiritual Director before a gradual transformation happened.

The book started very well and its writing style and intrinsic motivation of the first chapters to hold the Weekly Sabbath are very convincing. But the quality of the book soon takes a sharp u-turn, almost as if two different authors would have written the book. As soon as The Message Bible (Eugene Peterson, same college where he got his Master from), witchcraft and an obvious tendency to mysticism sneaked in, the book lost its value, from a book to be highly praised for the first chapters, to a book to be warned against.

- He mentions in his book the 'Prayer of Examen', a prayer developed by Jesuits.

- Hints to the book 'The Attentive Life' by Leighton Ford and Richard Foster (Renovare, Catholic Mystic, Contemplative Prayer).

- Positive quotes and stories from books by C.S. Lewis, J.R. Tolkien and Brother Lawrence, all highly problematic teachers.

- Quotes from Henri Nouwen, a Catholic priest and big name in Mysticism / Contemplative Prayer.

- The author mentions several times the act of emptying yourself (Kenosis), without explaining what he means by it. Kenosis is a misapplication of Jesus having temporarily emptied Himself from His divine power. We do not have divine power to be emptied from. To the contrary, we want the Spirit to fill us to prevent demons from filling an unoccupied house (Mat 12:44).

- He also mentions over and over 'silence and solitude', terms commonly used by Avila, Comer, Eldredge, Nouwen, Foster, Peterson, Rohr, Yancey and Willard, all supporters of Catholic Mysticism and Contemplative Prayer.

- The author first discourages people from making others work on the Sabbath, only to later list several examples how he did and would again violate the law by purchasing e.g. after an excursion. Double moral which clearly violates God’s command. He would have done well to show only a little of the courage he showed when going into the waters with his son and to better define the Sabbath without drifting into legalism. He also wrongly stated that the Bible does not provide any specification and e.g. totally missed the New Covenant indication in Acts to not travel extensively on the Sabbath. The book generally misses exegesis, what would be fine if other authors would plow that field. If only. The book does great in encouraging, but this does not last for long if the parameters and reasoning for the obedience are not provided.

- The book suffers a lot of misinterpretations of Bible verses, exaggerations, invented conversations and acts. After 3/4 of the book, it became painful to see the Word of God being twisted over and over again. At this point in life the author was immature in his faith (at least what is visible through his writings) and would have been disqualified for writing Christian books, while being a writer with great skills for secular books. But listening to the initially mentioned interview, I suspect that this definitely changed for good.

- The author encourages other Christians to trespass warning signs and to risk their lives in dangerous waters.

+ The speaker of the audiobook is simply excellent.

More regarding the Weekly Sabbath:

- He totally misses explaining the Extraordinary / Ceremonial Sabbaths. Without this differentiation we cannot grasp the differences between Old Covenant and Moral Law, between what is gone and what is still valid. A missed opportunity to motivate people by showing the much more burdensome parts of obedience that are gone, and making the Weekly Sabbath appear easy in light of what is gone.

- Romans 14 is misinterpreted. In order to believe that this verse is talking about the Weekly Sabbath, we would have to inject it into the text, based on a preconceived belief, rather than getting it from the text itself. The entire chapter 14 of Romans is exclusively related to food and the verse most probably relates to either pagan festivals (the Romans observed 40 days per year !) and/or the Extraordinary Sabbaths (Feasts) that were usually related to the consumption of specific food (lamb, unleavened bread, no yeast, et al.). A Weekly Sabbath has no indications at all on personal food, therefore it is grossly negligent to insert this Sabbath into this verse.

- He leaves the timing of the Weekly Sabbath open to personal interpretation, but does not state why he thinks that God leaves this choice to us. It would have been beautiful to see some boldness here and to show why a Sabbath can only mean from Sunrise Saturday to Sunrise Sunday, and not any man-made tradition.

- The interpretation of 'Lord's Day' in Rev 1:10 is wrong. It simply means in a better translation a 'day pertaining to the Lord', ultimately describing the Sabbath in other words, while John used constantly a different term for 'the first day of the week'.

+ The interpretation of Hebrews is countercultural and indeed great. One of the few people who understand the 3 dimensions (past-, present-, and future) of those verses.

Thanks or you remarks but to be honest I'm looking for your thoughts, not someone else's that you've copied and pasted (which seems to be the bulk of your response) certainly we all know anyone can post a review that praises just as well as hates, but a review contest is not what I'm interested in so let's keep the reviews to our own time.

Since you have not read the book then your support for a review would amount to speculation and that's simply the type of culture I'm trying to avoid. So let's keep our comments more grounded to what's going on in here than the million voices out there.

This also is not debate on Sabbath, nor will I entertain debate. I'm reading this book to get an appreciation of the point the author is challenging us with and sharing the journey. If you can't enter into a similar appreciation then this is not the thread for you.

In case there is confusion this is directed at your comment "Personally I would never take the words of a man over the Word of God". We are all Christians here and this statement should be implied so although true when stated it's implictly challening the OP (me) that I have a focus of the words of man over the word of God. So I'm sure you can understand my frustration when this is your opening comment.

I'll remind you what I stated in the OP "Respond as if each loves God and desires to serve him as much as you do, anything else has no place in this thread". I will be direct, your opening line violates this so please don't start this way. This is the last time I will address the subject with you, there is no need to reply but please do me the honour of your respect and love with this matter.

 

[honey badger]

"The Sabbath is spiritual (as Paul had said), just as the Sabbath/Jubilee of the land, and relates to soul; rest is a state of being (in him). He is our rest as we are his, an habitation of God." x141

 

[DamianWarS]

In a positive spin I appreciate when defining "work" Buchanan says "it's all the Lord's work", to help with clarity he quotes Luther saying:

"The maid who sweeps her kitchen is doing the will of God just as much as the monk who prays—not because she may sing a Christian hymn as she sweeps but because God loves clean floors. The Christian shoemaker does his Christian duty not by putting little crosses on the shoes, but by making good shoes, because God is interested in good craftsmanship." x23

however I feel this needs to be filled out more. It is not the excellence of our labour that is good, but that we use our labour as a tool to glorify God, if we do that, the result should always be excellence. This also puts a new spin on "worship" because worship should be through all our actions, not just the ones we sing hymns to or put little crosses on, but all our actions.

Buchanan get's there and perhaps uses his literally style to draw the reader in more so these questions are more natural. He is quoted:

"The opposite of a slave is not a free man. It’s a worshiper. The one who is most free is the one who turns the work of his hands into sacrament, into offering. All he makes and all he does are gifts from God, through God, and to God." x24

I appreciate this focus and how he spins work around not to divide holy/secular but to show how all our actions are for the Glory of God, and in this motivation nothing should be thought of as secular to the Christian.

Buchanan continues:
"so simple tasks—preparing sermons, cooking soup, cutting grass, growing corn—when done in the same spirit, are holy. It is all the Lord’s work. Virtually any job, no matter how grueling or tedious—any job that is not criminal or sinful—can be a gift from God, through God, and to God. The work of our hands, by the alchemy of our devotion, becomes the worship of our hearts." x24

He leaves us motivated and challenged that our actions are holy not because of what they are or when they are done but because of their purpose behind them. And these are good points I'd like to highlight from the first chapter.

 

[Leaf473]

In a positive spin I appreciate when defining "work" Buchanan says "it's all the Lord's work", to help with clarity he quotes Luther saying:

"The maid who sweeps her kitchen is doing the will of God just as much as the monk who prays—not because she may sing a Christian hymn as she sweeps but because God loves clean floors. The Christian shoemaker does his Christian duty not by putting little crosses on the shoes, but by making good shoes, because God is interested in good craftsmanship." x23

however I feel this needs to be filled out more. It is not the excellence of our labour that is good, but that we use our labour as a tool to glorify God, if we do that, the result should always be excellence. This also puts a new spin on "worship" because worship should be through all our actions, not just the ones we sing hymns to or put little crosses on, but all our actions.

Buchanan get's there and perhaps uses his literally style to draw the reader in more so these questions are more natural. He is quoted:

"The opposite of a slave is not a free man. It’s a worshiper. The one who is most free is the one who turns the work of his hands into sacrament, into offering. All he makes and all he does are gifts from God, through God, and to God." x24

I appreciate this focus and how he spins work around not to devide holy/secular but to show how all our actions are for the Glory of God, and in this motivation nothing should be thought of as secular to the Christian.

Buchanan continues:
"so simple tasks—preparing sermons, cooking soup, cutting grass, growing corn—when done in the same spirit, are holy. It is all the Lord’s work. Virtually any job, no matter how grueling or tedious—any job that is not criminal or sinful—can be a gift from God, through God, and to God. The work of our hands, by the alchemy of our devotion, becomes the worship of our hearts." x24

He leaves us motivated and challenged that our actions are holy not because of what they are or when they are done but because of their purpose behind them. And these are good points I'd like to highlight from the first chapter.

I don't have access to the book, so I can't comment on it as a whole.

But regarding the quoted passages, I agree with that approach to work.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Thanks or you remarks but to be honest I'm looking for your thoughts, not someone else's that you've copied and pasted (which seems to be the bulk of your response) certainly we all know anyone can post a review that praises just as well as hates, but a review contest is not what I'm interested in so let's keep the reviews to our own time.

Since you have not read the book then your support for a review would amount to speculation and that's simply the type of culture I'm trying to avoid. So let's keep our comments more grounded to what's going on in here than the million voices out there.

This also is not debate on Sabbath, nor will I entertain debate. I'm reading this book to get an appreciation of the point the author is challenging us with and sharing the journey. If you can't enter into a similar appreciation then this is not the thread for you.

In case there is confusion this is directed at your comment "Personally I would never take the words of a man over the Word of God". We are all Christians here and this statement should be implied so although true when stated it's implictly challening the OP (me) that I have a focus of the words of man over the word of God. So I'm sure you can understand my frustration when this is your opening comment.

I'll remind you what I stated in the OP "Respond as if each loves God and desires to serve him as much as you do, anything else has no place in this thread". I will be direct, your opening line violates this so please don't start this way. This is the last time I will address the subject with you, there is no need to reply but please do me the honour of your respect and love with this matter.

Just to clarify, this statement 'Personally I would never take the words of a man over the Word of God" was directed towards the author of the book, I should have stated so, my apologies for not making that clear. No I haven't read the book as most people who responded in this thread has not either, I did read enough to know the author appears to want to reinvent the Sabbath commandment, I am simply pointing us back to God's Word for our teachings. I have never stated or even insinuated that one does or does not love God, that is a matter of the heart and only God can judge, so not my place. I can only post the biblical definition of love to God 1 John 5:3 Exo 20:6 John 14:15 in hopes people will accept. At any rate, I do not mind signing out of the thread. God bless!

 

[Leaf473]

Just to clarify, this statement 'Personally I would never take the words of a man over the Word of God" was directed towards the author of the book, I should have stated so, my apologies for not making that clear.

No I haven't read the book as most people who responded in this thread has not either,

Hi SB, it's fine if you don't want to respond to this, but who is the "most people" you are referring to there? I believe the OP says they are reading it, the writer of post #4 appears to be quoting from it, at least I think.

So other than yourself, there are two people (OP and post #4) who have read/or reading it, and one person (myself) who hasn't, other than the quoted passages.

Does it look differently to you?

...I did read enough to know the author appears to want to reinvent the Sabbath commandment,

What did you read? The passages quoted here? Some book reviews? I'm curious, if you wish to say

I am simply pointing us back to God's Word for our teachings. I have never stated or even insinuated that one does or does not love God, that is a matter of the heart and only God can judge, so not my place. I can only post the biblical definition of love to God 1 John 5:3 in hopes people will accept. At any rate, I do not mind signing out of the thread. God bless!

Peace be with you

 

[Leaf473]

"The opposite of a slave is not a free man. It’s a worshiper. The one who is most free is the one who turns the work of his hands into sacrament, into offering."

Great quote from the book. Interesting that he uses more liturgical language, "sacrament".

 

[Clare73]

Thanks or you remarks but to be honest I'm looking for your thoughts, not someone else's

My thoughts are those of the NT.

The rest of God is the Sabbath rest, which in the NT is Jesus, were we rest from our own works to save and in his work which saved.

 

[DamianWarS]

Each chapter ends in what the authors calls a "Sabbath Liturgy" which appears to be practical advice that can be applied to daily living. Chapter 1 concludes with the authors thoughts on work and how we should approach it and I appreciate his focus on transforming work into an act of worship. His reflecting comments are as follows

"[The apostle Paul's] best and most enduring lesson was this: whatever you can do with a clean conscience, you can do to the glory of God. No work is so menial that it cannot be rendered as worship."x26-27

This is more of a paraphrase and I couldn't find any scripture that the author is quoting but these verses come to mind:

1 Cor 7:20-22
Each one should remain in the situation he was in when he was called. Were you a slave when you were called? Do not let it concern you—but if you can gain your freedom, take the opportunity. For he who was a slave when he was called by the Lord is the Lord’s freedman. Conversely, he who was a free man when he was called is Christ’s slave.

1 Cor 10:31
So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God.

Buchanan's challenge is this:
"What if your work became worship? What if the work of your hands—repairing lawn mowers, scouring pots, paving streets, mending bones, balancing ledgers—was Eucharistic, a sacrament of God’s presence that you gave and received? What if Jesus himself was your boss, the One who watched over you and whom you honored with your efforts?

Here’s a radical idea: next time you’re tempted to complain about your work, praise God for it instead. Next time you open your mouth to gossip about people you work with or smear those you work for, stop yourself and turn in the other direction: pray for them, thank God for them, find the good in them. Next time you want to quit, pour that into worship." x27

Regardless what you think of the author or book (even what little you know) I can agree this is certainly useful and godly advice. My take away is I can approach all tasks as worship to God and if I can't... then I probably shouldn't be doing the tasks.

 

[DamianWarS]

Chapter 2 focuses on viewing time spent with purpose. The author does so by contrasting the two Greek terms for time which are chronos and kairos. He shows how Chronos (derived words: chronological, chronical, chronic, etc....) is the name of a Greek god that ended up eating his own children in his rage and insatiable appetite and uses this analogy to say chronos is like a time that consumes you but leaves you unsatisfied and empty. Conversely kiaros is more of a purpose driven time and it is the latter we should be aiming for in Sabbath rest.

The authors handling of these words have been critiqued in quoted reviews (yes I read them). The author is someone anadoctally driven probably for literally effect and may not give good justice to the terms, although I felt it was fine, but to add to the definition wiki constrasted the terms this way:

[Kairos] is one of two words that the ancient Greeks had for 'time'; the other being chronos (χρόνος). Whereas the latter refers to chronological or sequential time, kairos signifies a proper or opportune time for action. In this sense, while chronos is quantitative, kairos has a qualitative, permanent nature. Wiki

For me I resonate with the quantative/qualitative contrast and this aids in the understanding of his concepts.

Buchanan is quoted
Or we learn to follow the scent of eternity in our hearts. We begin to orient toward kairos. We start to sanctify some of our time. And an odd thing can happen then. Purpose, even unsought, can take shape out of the smallest, simplest things: “I know that there is nothing better for men than to be happy and do good while they live. That everyone may eat and drink, and find satisfaction in all his toil—this is the gift of God” (Eccl. 3:12–13). x37

The author is of course is building a value set for Sabbath practice but this concept of purpose driven time is not unique to Sabbath time and should be seen as a universal value over all our time spent not just time spend in Sabbath and no specific time should be seen an "better" for purpose otherwise we risk creating a holy/secular divide. He uses this concept so we don't see Sabbath merely as a emptying of yourself or idle leasuire that we judge as a contrast of whatever our regular is stating the largest obsticle of Sabbath is leasuire time and in this his point has does have merit. I myself have gone on vacation ending it needing a vacation from vacation as too much takes a toll on you. He took a while to build this point, building first a lengthy personal account of how perspective change is vital, (again not a specific Sabbath value), as a segue to approach Sabbath (or broadly all spent time) in this "kairos" space.

This concept is highly agreeable and can be universally applied to Christian living. My fear is Buchanan is building a list anadoctes we can and should all agree with that are not unique to Sabbath and it may make the Sabbath specific points later in the book feel more agreeable like a puzzle that all fits together. The author may also be using this to present a uncovential use of time during Sabbath that may involve things that look like work but be purpose driven for rest (like restoring a car or doing wood work if those things relax you)

I'm a skeptic at heart which means I question everything (so don't mind me). I'm ok with this, and admittedly this might not be as loaded as I'm making it out to be and the author may be responsibly building a biblical tool box to approach Sabbath correctly. However, so far no unique Sabbath points have been addressed. The author takes his literally liberties with lengthy anadoctes that we all can amen but he hasn't focus uniquely on Sabbath yet. So we will see what is to come.

 

[Leaf473]

Chapter 2 focuses on viewing time spent with purpose. The author does so by contrasting the two Greek terms for time which are chronos and kairos. He shows how Chronos (derived words: chronological, chronical, chronic, etc....) is the name of a Greek god that ended up eating his own children in his rage and insatiable appetite and uses this analogy to say chronos is like a time that consumes you but leaves you unsatisfied and empty. Conversely kiaros is more of a purpose driven time and it is the latter we should be aiming for in Sabbath rest.

The authors handling of these words have been critiqued in quoted reviews (yes I read them). The author is someone anadoctally driven probably for literally effect and may not give good justice to the terms, although I felt it was fine, but to add to the definition wiki constrasted the terms this way:

[Kairos] is one of two words that the ancient Greeks had for 'time'; the other being chronos (χρόνος). Whereas the latter refers to chronological or sequential time, kairos signifies a proper or opportune time for action. In this sense, while chronos is quantitative, kairos has a qualitative, permanent nature. Wiki

For me I resonate with the quantative/qualitative contrast and this aids in the understanding of his concepts.

Buchanan is quoted

Or we learn to follow the scent of eternity in our hearts. We begin to orient toward kairos.

It sounds like the author uses poetic imagery at times, I like that

We start to sanctify some of our time. And an odd thing can happen then. Purpose, even unsought, can take shape out of the smallest, simplest things: “I know that there is nothing better for men than to be happy and do good while they live. That everyone may eat and drink, and find satisfaction in all his toil—this is the gift of God” (Eccl. 3:12–13). x37

The author is of course is building a value set for Sabbath practice but this concept of purpose driven time is not unique to Sabbath time and should be seen as a universal value over all our time spent not just time spend in Sabbath and no specific time should be seen an "better" for purpose otherwise we risk creating a holy/secular divide. He uses this concept so we don't see Sabbath merely as a emptying of yourself or idle leasuire that we judge as a contrast of whatever our regular is stating the largest obsticle of Sabbath is leasuire time and in this his point has does have merit. I myself have gone on vacation ending it needing a vacation from vacation as too much takes a toll on you. He took a while to build this point, building first a lengthy personal account of how perspective change is vital, (again not a specific Sabbath value), as a segue to approach Sabbath (or broadly all spent time) in this "kairos" space.

This concept is highly agreeable and can be universally applied to Christian living. My fear is Buchanan is building a list anadoctes we can and should all agree with that are not unique to Sabbath and it may make the Sabbath specific points later in the book feel more agreeable like a puzzle that all fits together. The author may also be using this to present a uncovential use of time during Sabbath that may involve things that look like work but be purpose driven for rest (like restoring a car or doing wood work if those things relax you)

I'm a skeptic at heart which means I question everything (so don't mind me). I'm ok with this, and admittedly this might not be as loaded as I'm making it out to be and the author may be responsibly building a biblical tool box to approach Sabbath correctly. However, so far no unique Sabbath points have been addressed. The author takes his literally liberties with lengthy anadoctes that we all can amen but he hasn't focus uniquely on Sabbath yet. So we will see what is to come.

 

[DamianWarS]

In chapter 2 the authors challenge is more focused on a perspective change which lends itself to how we view time. He uses Solomon throughout the chapter and lengthy pretend conversations with him. he seems to land at quoting proverbs but then seems to jump into paraphrasing it but the line that stood out is

The wisdom of the wise is to give thought to their ways. They think about where they’re going. But the folly of fools is deception. They keep lying to themselves. Wise people ask, Does the path I’m walking lead to a place I want to go? If I keep heading this way, will I like where I arrive? x40

 

[DamianWarS]

chapter 3 takes another look at a more universal value that can be applied to the Sabbath with a sort of "stop to smell the roses" focus. where it does blend well with the other themes of slowing down plus purpose and worship driven it's not a unique Sabbath value but merely a value that is useful to include in a purpose-driven rest. The Author is revealing more and more of his hand, identifying a Sunday Sabbath as well as capturing sabbath moments during mid-week events. This is all consistent with Chapter 2's concept of "kairos" time, although the word is not mentioned in this chapter it's revealed concept in chapter 2 is a dominate theme.

I don't know where this will go if the author will ultimately welcome a floating more dynamic Sabbath day and/or Sabbath moments or more of a traditional Sabbath model of Sunday/Saturday system but the framework the author has started would allow Sabbath to be fairly dynamic, however it still seems focused on a physical day.

I am involved in the coffee industry and with preparing coffee, speciality/third wave focuses of coffee, pour-over over or espresso both have a wetting the dry grinds phase that's done first referred to as blooming or pre-infusion. this preps the coffee to be fully saturated and ready for the main body of liquid so that it can extract the most possible and it's the anecdote I would give to describe what the author is doing here. He is preparing the reader so they are ready to receive something the author considereds the substance of Sabbath. Still no mention of salvation within a Sabbath model and so far there has been no Sabbath specific values that cannot be a part of everyday living. I get the need to ready the stage a bit and certainly in a content-driven approach it's useful to fill pages. it's not so much that the information is boring or merely "filler" but taking its time to get to the point.

No specific quotes stood out for this chapter, although the author avoided the cliche "stop and smell the roses" it's basically the sum of the chapter.

 

[DamianWarS]

This book seems to be less of a case for Sabbath and more of a set of useful Sabbath practices/outlooks. Again chapter 4 doesn't contribe anything unique to Sabbath. It's about being thankful which of course is a value we can practice inside and outside Sabbath keeping practices.

There is an assumption in the text that the reader already accepts Sabbath keeping but doesn't know how to approach it. We need rest, we need to slow down and be more purpose driven and we need to be thankful, all this is also biblical but it's like the author is building a list of demands of living to expose a need to keep Sabbath. This is fine and I can accept this for what it is but it relies on a lot on a formula approach to why we should keep Sabbath that is biblical themed but not explict.

He has a moment when he bullies the point of Sabbath too saying "If God can take any mess, any mishap, any wastage, any wreckage, any anything, and choreograph beauty and meaning from it, then you can take a day off." x63

As a 4th commandment Sabbath keeping skeptic I don't see the connection that because of God's sovereignty over all things I must keep Sabbath. This seems like an amen for the choir but not the crowds and Buchanan hasn't given enough support for Sabbath to say this, much less force it. He has made points as to why we need purpose driven rest but there is a missing part of this as to a new covenant outlook of what that looks like. So when he says "you must" what is it he's saying I must do so I may agree or disagree with?

His anadoctes also betray him. He uses the event of Paul and Silas put in jail to show that even in distress we can keep Sabbath. Paul and Silas of course were not formally keeping Sabbath in jail but the author tries to us show that through their attitude, prayer and worship they were able to bring about a Sabbath moment.

Paul and Silas sing. Paul and Silas pray. Paul and Silas hold church. They take Sabbath. They rejoice in the suffering. x70

When their shackles are released and the jail comes crumbling down the author uses this as a moment to build Sabbath keeping (assuming that's his point) into salvation

The Philippian jailer rushes up to Paul and Silas with one question: “What must I do to be saved? ” (Acts 16:30). What must I do to meet the God you know, the God whose love inspires thankfulness no matter what, the God who can subdue the hardest heart, the God who can put into the hearts of captives compassion for their captor? x71

The line the author draws is we must keep Sabbath to be saved. The actual answer given is "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household." (Act 16:31). The author is conflating Sabbath and salvation by identifying the event in the jail as a Sabbath moment and then the jailer ultimately asking for that moment (ergo asking for Sabbath)

broadly I agree, Sabbath is ultimately about salvation and the two are inseparable but is the author using this to force a point of Sabbath that the text has nothing to do with? What is "keeping Sabbath" for Buchanan? Is it abstract and defined in these "Sabbath moments", is it driven by covenant law definition, or somewhere in the middle where the requirements are stripped away but the goal is still driven on a day. At what level is this outlook of Sabbath required for salvation as this is what the author is essentially suggesting? Is the author using sabbath/salvation as like terms? If so it needs to be unpacked more least we fall into an legalism trap and call that salvation.

I get it, the question of "what must I do to be saved" is actually quite loaded, the first step being belief in a Christ but continues with abiding in Christ which is a much longer answer. I'm just not sure where the author is going with this and what aspects the author is conflating with salvation.

 

[DamianWarS]

this thread seems to have turned into me journaling my thoughts as I read each chapter. I'm ok with this. Sabbath to me is one of the most fundamental concepts in the bible and in Christian living and I enjoy its study. Which is why I look at this book. However so far this book hasn't given me any Sabbath unique characteristics and Chapter 5 is no different.

I'm seeing a trend in the chapters to list a more universal need and then apply it or even assume it over Sabbath. In Chapter 5 the author does a quick review over all his previous concepts:

For only those who number their days aright gain wise hearts. Only they become God’s sages: those calm, unhurried people who live in each moment fully, savoring simple things, celebrating small epiphanies, unafraid of life’s inevitable surprises and reverses, adaptive to change yet not chasing after it. x77

Buchanan seems to be exposing our need for these purposed-rest characteristics to support the need for keeping a Sabbath day and attitude (two aspects he often references). We need rest, we need to slow down and be more aware and present in the things around us, we need to find worship in these things, etc... and although that should be true of all moments it probably isn't. He is not explicit about this but my takeaway thus far is we have a void with these things in our lives that if not addressed will be left as a void so expect to mess up throughout the week but allow one day to be more intentional. Again this is not explicit in the text, but since these are all universal concepts it feels that is the practical goals to keep these things one day of a week.

the message of the chapter is summed up in it's last line:

Most of us live afraid that we’re almost out of time. But you and I, we’re heirs of eternity. We’re not short of days. We just need to number them aright. x82

"number them aright" (or something similar) is repeated often throughout the chapter. it's hard to pin point a unique concept in this chapter as it seems more about a sum of the other traits applied purposefully so we don't wear ourselves too thin and to not be so defined by our vocation or the things we get paid for. a quote that stood out is:

“My whole life I have been complaining that my work was constantly interrupted,” Henri Nouwen said near the end of his life, “until I discovered the interruptions were my work.” x79

Buchanan then paraphrases the text in Matthew 25:31-46 where in v 42-43 says "For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’" The author then refers to these encounters "when [Jesus] wore the disguise of an interruption" .x80

He continues on this topic of purpose and states:

"The span between life as we intend it and life as we receive it is vast. Our true purpose is worked out in that gap. It is fashioned in the crucible of interruptions." x81

his challenge to us is time can be paradoxical whereby the more we take, the less we have but the more we give it seems the more we have.

This all relates to Sabbath-keeping. Generous people have more time. That’s the irony: those who sanctify time and who give time away—who treat time as gift and not possession—have time in abundance. Contrariwise, those who guard every minute, resent every interruption, ration every moment, never have enough. x83

I appreciate this focus on time being a gift from God and like all things given by God we need to be good stewards of that time and in a gospel "love your neighbor" way time is not something we should hoard but should be generous with. To me this was the greater take away viewing time as an act of worship in how we share it and allow others to be a part of it which of course means giving ourselves to those moments. These are still more universal values but I have always disliked a too often seen side of the church where there is labeled time for God called Sabbath but you are too busy to love your neighbor for the rest of the time. I always favor a missional perspective even in Sabbath vacuums. Christ himself tells us "it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath" (Mat 12:12) which I see Christ saying keep the Sabbath but never at the cost of doing good, or at the loss of an opportunity to love. I may very well be pulling out what I like and applying it to my own perspective of the Sabbath but so far the frame work the author is building allows for this. Maybe in the coming chapters, he will give some clearer boundaries that will discourage or encourage this.

 

[DamianWarS]

Bit of a break from traveling then subsequently getting sick from traveling. But the plan is still to work through each chapter even if it takes a pit longer.

chapter six is so far the most interesting chapter and more much specific to Sabbath than the previous chapters that were more universal values of how to rest better. I get a sense the goal of the first 5 is to prepare the reader how to better rest before it gets into deeper aspects. At least I hope it gets deeper but chapter six at least teases this trajectory.

chapter 6 pits this idea of "taskmasters" as an anti-rest sentiment we must try and rid ourselves from. comparisons are made with the slavery of the Israelites and the Egyptians the "taskmasters".

What I most liked is contrasting 4th commandment according to Exodus and Deuteronomy and looking at what their focuses in these texts were trying to pull out. I see a lot of these texts to be more goal-driven than raw facts and information. the details that make up these accounts are there to support and build up the goal and if we can understand the goal then we have a better understanding of why the details look the way they do and that seems to be what the author is doing when contrasting Exodus and Deuteronomy.

The author is quoted saying "Exodus grounds Sabbath in creation. Deuteronomy grounds it in liberation" (x87). That statement alone was profound to me (no doubt not an original concept but still new to me).

"The Exodus command, with its call to imitation, plays on a hidden irony: we mimic God in order to remember we’re not God. In fact, that is a good definition of Sabbath: imitating God so that we stop trying to be God. x87"

In Exodus, there is a calling back to creation starting with "remember..." and as we read creation we naturally desire to mimic God but in doing so are reminded we are not God and of our need and dependence upon him. The Author reminds us God is complete without rest but we are not and to sustain life we require rest. this biological demand forces us to rest as well as reinforce we are not God and so because of this the author says Sabbath is a return to Eden.

The Deuteronomy side however takes a different spin and reminds us of how God brought us out of slavery and because we have been rescued from salvary we are to obverse the Sabbath. It is not because God rested on the Sabbath but because God liberated you from your captains and since rest is a condition of liberty the charge is to keep the Sabbath as a statement that we live in freedom, not in bondage.

So where Exodus is a call back to the garden Deuteronomy is a refusal to go back to Egypt which are interesting perspectives and perhaps speak to the textual base of these sections of Exodus and Deuteronomy where the former may have more of a priestly base (P text type) and the latter more nation based (JE text type)

in this chapter the author chooses to look at the liberty angle of Deuteronomy with a charge to quiet the inner taskmaster inside of us: "Taskmasters despise rest. They create a culture where rest must be stolen, savored on the sly, and of course then it’s not rest:" (x91) and goes on how the taskmasters will remind us there is no rest when there is unfinished work so we have no right to rest. The author reminds us that despite what is finished or not we "have an inescapable need for rest" (x93)

Buchanan's answer to this inescapable need for rest despite our right to rest is:
So what? Get this straight: The rest of God—the rest God gladly gives so that we might discover that part of God we’re missing—is not a reward for finishing. It’s not a bonus for work well done. (x93)

his conclusions continue saying "There can be no real worship without true rest" (x94)

I think this may be more profound than the chapter allows it to be. The ideas of liberation from slavery and our inescapable need for rest and dependence upon God but also knowing we have no right to rest, all points the chapter makes, to me point to a salvation message through the rest. The author very slightly hints at this in his list of things he has no right to which includes salvation but it seems more of an addition to the rest than it is seen as the same concept. The author perhaps teases the concept but fails to explicitly say rest = salvation and salvation = rest and I'm not sure if this is intentional.

If I were to add to this I would say that the idea of Sabbath rest is innately a celebration of completed work. when we rest we have no right to rest in ourselves and there may be unfinished work yet we may still rest not because we have a right to rest but because we are clothed with the rest that Christ gives us and in that rest we may be complete and holy as he is complete and holy. So I would focus on completeness through the sabbath, not on what we can accomplish but on what Christ has accomplished.

I enjoyed the comparison of the 4th commandment of Exodus/Deuteronomy but the ultimate point of creation and liberation I think is in the end the same message. from Egypt, we are liberated, and since creation, we are called out of darkness. the 7th day is the answer to the darkness of before day 1 and this can be viewed as a liberation and freedom from the darkness and biblical speaking they point to the same message. So although I see the point the author is making I see more similarities in the depth of the text than I see them as pulling us in a different direction but I suspect the author is moving the reader this way.

 

[DamianWarS]

I'm losing momentum and slowing down but I'll get through it eventually. Chapter seven was about identifying Sabbath outside a legalistic mindset. a definition the author uses to define legalism is

"Legalism is the reduction of life to mere technicalities. It substitutes code for conscience, ritual for worship, rectitude for holiness, morality for purity. The most bizarre lines of reasoning appear completely natural to a legalist: you must never heal on the Sabbath, but you can plot the death of those who do. (x107-108)

the latter of course is a reference to the Pharisees plotting to kill Jesus after they catch him healing on the Sabbath. I appreciated the focus of legalism and certainly do agree with it particularly with worship as this a universal call upon each of our lives. When worship cannot happen unless certain oddities are in order then we've missed the point and are more system driven.

The Chapter tries to focus Sabbath from a day that we set aside our own insticts to have more intentional experiences which is reminiscent of his other points in earlier chapters but what he adds is to stop trying to count and measure it all which risks a legalistic motivation. His non-specific Sabbath examples include slowing down to read his kids a bedtime story and sharing a moment that would have been lost had he listened to his drive inside of him to go back to work. Another example was visiting his wife's grandmother weekly with a failing illness, his instinct was to avoid the place but found the experience more enriching and had he listened to his first instict he would have missed out. Such examples are more focused on principles of life rather than Sabbath, although he doesn't mentioned it in this chapter other chapters reference "sabbath moments" which clearly is more the focus here.

the driving point is to slow down, be more intentional, and surrender/deny our need/desire to what drives us to work so we may open ourselves to more enriching moments we would have otherwise failed to see. The verse used is Lev 23:32 "It is a day of sabbath rest for you, and you must deny yourselves." it is this denial of self that leads us to sabbath moments (like laughing with our kids reading a storybook...)

broadly these are good points and the author is saying this needs to happen as a set aside day of the week. Although the points, albeit anecdotal, do make sense and are easily agreeable, the author fails to make the connecting point that this demands a sabbath day. The case he does make strong is these moments are critical and we should adopt these principles in all things we do, he simply fails to establish it as a unique sabbath day case which is in part his conclusion. I am inspired to do these things and the author is successful in that charge but the motivation for me is for every moment, not just a single day and that's where the author doesn't do a good job. (Perhaps intentional, I'm not sure). In the end, I'm left with thoughts that as humans we are predisposed to various ambitions that drive us to keep going, the author is making a claim we need to check ourselves and stop so that our hyperdrive ambitions don't miss all the beauty that can only been seen when we stop. To highly driven type A people this may make more sense that they need to force themselves to stop, but I would think to others it could come more naturally and the demand to put on breaks once a week may be less of a need since these principles may be practiced through our the week in all moments. The author's case seems to be a charge to those who don't want to stop.

in the case of Lev 23:32 the author never makes this connection but it would be remiss of me not to bring up what seems to be a parallel of Christ's own words in Mat 16:24 "Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me." In the case of following the Sabbath and following Christ both demand a denial of self and both have a product of rest. To me, the parallel is intentional as Christ is the Sabbath we should be seeking (preferably in all moments).

 

[Gary K]

I'm losing momentum and slowing down but I'll get through it eventually. Chapter seven was about identifying Sabbath outside a legalistic mindset. a definition the author uses to define legalism is

"Legalism is the reduction of life to mere technicalities. It substitutes code for conscience, ritual for worship, rectitude for holiness, morality for purity. The most bizarre lines of reasoning appear completely natural to a legalist: you must never heal on the Sabbath, but you can plot the death of those who do. (x107-108)

the latter of course is a reference to the Pharisees plotting to kill Jesus after they catch him healing on the Sabbath. I appreciated the focus of legalism and certainly do agree with it particularly with worship as this a universal call upon each of our lives. When worship cannot happen unless certain oddities are in order then we've missed the point and are more system driven.

The Chapter tries to focus Sabbath from a day that we set aside our own insticts to have more intentional experiences which is reminiscent of his other points in earlier chapters but what he adds is to stop trying to count and measure it all which risks a legalistic motivation. His non-specific Sabbath examples include slowing down to read his kids a bedtime story and sharing a moment that would have been lost had he listened to his drive inside of him to go back to work. Another example was visiting his wife's grandmother weekly with a failing illness, his instinct was to avoid the place but found the experience more enriching and had he listened to his first instict he would have missed out. Such examples are more focused on principles of life rather than Sabbath, although he doesn't mentioned it in this chapter other chapters reference "sabbath moments" which clearly is more the focus here.

the driving point is to slow down, be more intentional, and surrender/deny our need/desire to what drives us to work so we may open ourselves to more enriching moments we would have otherwise failed to see. The verse used is Lev 23:32 "It is a day of sabbath rest for you, and you must deny yourselves." it is this denial of self that leads us to sabbath moments (like laughing with our kids reading a storybook...)

broadly these are good points and the author is saying this needs to happen as a set aside day of the week. Although the points, albeit anecdotal, do make sense and are easily agreeable, the author fails to make the connecting point that this demands a sabbath day. The case he does make strong is these moments are critical and we should adopt these principles in all things we do, he simply fails to establish it as a unique sabbath day case which is in part his conclusion. I am inspired to do these things and the author is successful in that charge but the motivation for me is for every moment, not just a single day and that's where the author doesn't do a good job. (Perhaps intentional, I'm not sure). In the end, I'm left with thoughts that as humans we are predisposed to various ambitions that drive us to keep going, the author is making a claim we need to check ourselves and stop so that our hyperdrive ambitions don't miss all the beauty that can only been seen when we stop. To highly driven type A people this may make more sense that they need to force themselves to stop, but I would think to others it could come more naturally and the demand to put on breaks once a week may be less of a need since these principles may be practiced through our the week in all moments. The author's case seems to be a charge to those who don't want to stop.

in the case of Lev 23:32 the author never makes this connection but it would be remiss of me not to bring up what seems to be a parallel of Christ's own words in Mat 16:24 "Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me." In the case of following the Sabbath and following Christ both demand a denial of self and both have a product of rest. To me, the parallel is intentional as Christ is the Sabbath we should be seeking (preferably in all moments).

Well you've correctly identified the murderers of Jesus anyway.