Nailing Down the Sabbath (2 of 2)

.

Just from a clear observation of its usage as noted earlier, the Greek sabbaton definitely refers to the seventh-day Sabbath, and had to have been clearly understood by Paul as one of those ceremonies that were to give way to the spiritual realities that are found in Christ. As a “shadow” is cast by an object, so too the Sabbath is only a “shadow” of the very body and image of Christ. And as we also said earlier, Christ is our true “Sabbath-rest,” of which the natural observance was but only “a sign” pointing us to the way, the truth and the life as found Him. Now that we have found the reality, the “sign” post has been abandoned. The reality—Christ's body—is now seen from which that shadow was cast! The “copies” on earth of the heavenly things are now abandoned for the very spiritual “realities” themselves (Heb. 10:1). This is very crucial for us to see and understand when forming our theology around the observance of anything in the Old Testament that was natural and physical, and a "type" as well at that. All this is why there is no longer any need for man-made temples, literal animal sacrifices, the Levitical priesthood, or circumcision and the like. And this is exactly why there is no future plan in God’s economy to reinstate all of these things. The “body” which cast those shadows has arrived; and Christ has dispelled all of those dark shadows once and for all. Now we can all the more appreciate the force of Paul’s words, when he says, “He took it away, nailing it to the cross”!

Ironically, William Hendriksen (also a sabbatarian) writes,

The real contrast drawn by the apostle is not precisely between that which is unreal and that which is real—the Old Testament regulations regarding these matters, and also the matters themselves, were real enough—, but rather between that which was passing and should therefore be discarded and that which is abiding. The shadow preceded the object casting it…Why cling to the shadow when the shadow-casting object has itself arrived? (New Testament Commentary, Colossians and Philemon, p. 124).

If Hendriksen would only have listened to his own words.

Lenski likewise concurs,

To try to cling to the shadow or to any part of it now, could mean only one thing, namely that what the shadow has so long foreshadowed was not understood, was not appreciated and desired now that it had all come. To the extent to which the Judaizers clung to the past shadow as if it were still present, to that extent they abandoned the body which had filled the place of the former shadow…The shadow is good for its time, by means of it faith and hope embrace the coming realities; but when men prefer the shadow instead of the realities they end with nothing, for even the shadow has disappeared when the shining, heavenly realities stand in its place (The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistles, p. 127).

So, to simply state all this in the words of Lenski, to continue the observance of all these things is to “abandon the body” and to essentially discard it for the shadows. And his is exactly what the author of Hebrews means when he says that by doing these things is to “trample under foot the Son of God and to count the blood of the covenant as an unholy thing and insult the Spirit of grace,” and is tantamount “to crucifying Christ all over again and subjecting Him to public disgrace.” It is like those in Galatia who were beguiled to be circumcised and treat Christ's once-and-for-all sacrifice as if it profited them nothing. In essence, this is the same as those today who maintain that we should still keep the Sabbath; it is basically someone saying that Christ alone does not profit us. For them, they need to keep the "shadow," in addition to holding onto the "body." But they can't have it both ways here. Either renounce the one and go with the other, or renounce the other and go with the one; otherwise, we are nothing more than a bunch of Judaizers who were trying to maintain the exact same things that they tried to do in the apostle's days. Who has bewitched you, brethren? This persuasion comes not from above. If we "rebuild" what has been destroyed, we make both us and Christ the ministers of sin. It is one thing to say that we are not "justified" by observing such shadows, but it is completely another thing to say that these "shadows" are still obligatory for us to do when Christ (the body which cast those shadows) has shown us otherwise. In essence, we are in fact "rebuilding" what Christ and the apostles have "destroyed." And if we do this, we are claiming that both Christ and all of us who no longer keep the Sabbath, circumcision, or any other OT rite or ceremony, are "lawbreakers" (or transgressors) and only worthy of God's judgment. And this is exactly what many people in the Church are teaching and believe in today---judgment from the Law for disobeying what the Law says concerning literal Sabbath-keeping.

Paul says that “we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the Lord's glory, are being transformed into His likeness with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit….For God, who said, ‘Let light shine out of darkness,’ made His light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ” (II Cor. 3:18; 4:6). We are no longer standing in the shadows; but in Christ God makes His light to “shine in our hearts…[right into] the face of Christ.” When Moses came down from the mount, his face shined from the presence and glory of God shining directly upon his face. Moses was not seeing “shadows,” but the real thing! And this is exactly what Paul is talking about when he likens us to now having the spiritual realities that are found in Christ, as opposed to the shadows which were only a dim mirror of Christ. May we all now cling to the "body" from which all of those "shadows" were cast. If we don't, we will only be pounding air.

III. What “Sabbath” is Paul Referring to in Col. 2:16?

The simple and short answer to this question is, as we have already ascertained, the seventy-day Sabbath! In fact, this entire statement by Paul in Col. 2:16 really does settle this matter for us once and for all. As I stated earlier, this statement by Paul is rooted and grounded in the OT Scriptures as a phrase which is commonly used specifically with regards to the Saturday Sabbath. And if not, then why even mention festival Sabbath days by themselves, if every Jew reading Paul's statement knew full-well that the Sabbaths in the festivals would be included as part-and-parcel with those festivals as well? It would be redundant for Paul to mention the Sabbath days of the festivals, when everyone knew full-well that those particular rest-days were inclusive with the festivals no longer being observed. Everything involved with in keeping the new moons and festivals was included as a "shadow" which has passed away, and Paul had to mention the seventh-day Sabbath days as well, so that no one would be mistaken as to what he is referring to. And, like I said, even the lists mentioned in the Old Testament substantiate this fact of Paul's list.

So what exactly do the Old Testament Scriptures say to us? Paul has told us in Colossians that no one is to judge us with regards to "the Festivals, the New Moons, or a Sabbath day"! And as we have already noted, whether the Sabbath here is to be understood in the plural or the singular, it makes no difference; the Greek genitive plural sabbaton is used for the singular seventh-day Sabbath. That much is clear.

But were these words of Paul just idle words on a list that he had made up in his own mind, with no rhyme or reason to them? Not at all. Like I said, it was a common phrase used repeatedly throughout the Old Testament. They are in fact the very words of Scripture that every Jew was very well familiar with. And by understanding and seeing this very important detail, we will then truly see that Paul does not have just festival rest-days in mind, but the very seventh-day Sabbath itself. This very important observation “nails” this ordinance, along with all the rest, to the cross of Christ. And like all of the rest of the carnal and natural ordinances, it too was truly “a shadow” that was dispelled by the light of the glory of God “in the face of Jesus Christ.”

Ezekiel 45:17, in agreement with Paul, states,

It will be the duty of the prince to provide the burnt offerings, grain offerings and drink offerings at the festivals, the New Moons and the Sabbaths—at all the appointed feasts of the house of Israel.

Here we see that this is the exact same list in the exact same order as Paul describes it. Does anyone now question where Paul might have got his list from? There is more! Keep reading.

Hosea 2:11 says,

I will also cause all her mirth to cease, her feasts, her new moons, and her sabbaths, and all her solemn assemblies (ASV).

Again, same list; same order.

Neh. 10:33:

We assume the responsibility for carrying out the commands to give a third of a shekel each year for the service of the house of our God: for the bread set out on the table; for the regular grain offerings and burnt offerings; for the offerings on the Sabbaths, New Moon festivals and appointed feasts; for the holy offerings; for sin offerings to make atonement for Israel; and for all the duties of the house of our God (NIV).

Same list, but now reversed in order. This, in itself, as we shall see, is very important.

I Chr. 23:30-31:

And each morning and evening they stood before the LORD to sing songs of thanks and praise to him. They assisted with the burnt offerings that were presented to the LORD on Sabbath days, at new moon celebrations, and at all the appointed festivals. The required number of Levites served in the Lord’s presence at all times, following all the procedures they had been given (NLT).

Again, the same list but in the reverse order of Paul’s list. And do you notice one more thing that was added? It is the “daily” standing before the Lord. This is significant to notice here, as we shall see in the next verse.

II Chr. 2:4:

Now I am about to build a temple for the Name of the LORD my God and to dedicate it to him for burning fragrant incense before him, for setting out the consecrated bread regularly, and for making burnt offerings every morning and evening and on Sabbaths and New Moons and at the appointed feasts of the LORD our God. This is a lasting ordinance for Israel (NIV).

Here the daily standing is accompanied with “burnt offerings every morning and evening.” And if you will also notice, the text seems to indicate that these “burnt offerings” were also to be done on the Saturday Sabbaths, as well as on the New Moon festivals and at the appointed feasts. Is this a correct evaluation of the text? Or, are we reading into the text more than we should here? Let’s read further—

II Chr. 8:12-13:

On the altar of the LORD that he had built in front of the portico, Solomon sacrificed burnt offerings to the LORD, according to the daily requirement for offerings commanded by Moses for Sabbaths, New Moons and the three annual feasts---the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks and the Feast of Tabernacles (NIV).

Here, the Scriptures further state that Solomon sacrificed “according to the daily requirement for offerings”----for not only the New Moons and festivals but also for the Saturday Sabbaths. We also now learn here that the burnt offerings offered every morning and evening with these ceremonies are a “requirement.” And we also learn here that the term “festivals” embodies the three main annual feasts of the Lord “the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks and the Feast of Tabernacles.” And as we will see, the “Feast of Trumpets” was another one, but evidently not considered as significant as these other three were. And also notice that the Saturday Sabbaths are mentioned SEPARATELY from these other festivals.

Now as we have seen, this list keeps expanding and growing greater in all the details. And again, it seems that Chronicles here is saying that these “burnt offerings” were not only done every morning and evening, but also on the Saturday Sabbaths, the New Moons, and during the three annual feasts! Are we again reading into the text more than what is really there? Was it just in the daily standings, other than the one on the Sabbath, that the “burnt offerings” were offered on? Or, were they offered on all of these occasions? Let’s read on.

II Chr. 31:3:

The king contributed from his own possessions for the morning and evening burnt offerings and for the burnt offerings on the Sabbaths, New Moons and appointed feasts as written in the Law of the LORD (NIV).

Now the book of Chronicles is starting to make it more clear to us that the burnt offerings were not only given on the daily morning and evening offerings, but the king also contributed of his own possessions “for the burnt offerings on the Sabbaths, New Moons, and appointed feasts” and then the text also adds, “as written in the law of the Lord.”

This one little list that Paul began with, as we have now seen, is exactly the same “little list” in its abbreviated form as mentioned by the prophets and Nehemiah. From its abbreviated and encapsulated form we have seen it expand and enlarge to not only reveal some greater details about these three celebrations, but along with this list has been added the “daily” offerings. And attending all of these ceremonies are “burnt offerings.” In addition, we also have come to understand that they were all a “requirement” that are “written in the law of the Lord.” So the million dollar question is: Where is it “written in the law of the Lord” a detailed list that states such “requirements”? The answer quite simply is, in Numbers 28-29! It is in Numbers that we find the expanded and complete list of both Paul’s and the Prophet’s “abbreviated” versions.

Paul’s abbreviated list would be like a Pastor or Teacher making a brief outline or summary of all that they wanted to speak on, and then adding to it, or “expanding” upon it to give a more detailed explanation. So go ahead, click on: “Festivals, New Moons, and Sabbaths” and begin to see for yourself the “expanded” version in Num. 28-29. This is exactly what all of these abbreviated versions mentioned above throughout the OT, and even in Paul's short list in Colossians, are all referring to.

What you will see in this "expanded" list in Numbers is all the required offerings for the “daily” offerings, for the “Sabbath-day” (or weekly) offerings, for the “Monthly” (or new moon) offerings, and for the “Festival” offerings. Included also are the “yearly” offerings made on the Day of Atonement and the Feast of Trumpets. And this also agrees with Paul’s statement in Gal. 4:10, “You are observing special days, months, seasons, and years.” And Paul’s “years” could even include the observance of sabbatical years as well. And as one reads the expanded version in Numbers 28-29, this list includes the seventh-day Sabbath. It would seem strange indeed that God would list all the offerings to be done on all the other celebrations throughout the year, but then leave out one of the most important celebrations of all—the Saturday Sabbath offerings! No, the Sabbaths in Paul’s list were all the weekly Sabbaths in the expanded list that were observed on a weekly basis throughout the year. The other rest-days that were observed during some of the festivals are also mentioned within those festivals themselves, but they are not a part of the main body or outline of those particular rest-days that are delineated for us as the seventh-day Sabbaths as separate and distinct from other days and the three annual festivals. The Jews did understand these other rest-days in the Festivals as Sabbaths, of sorts; and they referred to them as “High Sabbaths.” And there are seven of them. One particular one is noted in John. 19:31 on Nisan 15, the day after the Passover lamb was slain on Nisan 14. And it was actually a double-Sabbath observance on this particular day, where both the Saturday Sabbath and the High Sabbath fell on the same day. The next day, Nisan 16, was the day for the waving of the sheaf of firstfruits where Christ our Firstfruits from the dead was waved before the Lord for us.

IV. Was the Sabbath Nailed to the Cross Only With Regards to Our Salvation?

The answer to the third question above really answers this question. But consider this statement for a moment: the argument of no longer observing circumcision with regards to salvation did not leave anyone with any notion that it should be observed as obligatory afterward as a practical outworking of their salvation; so then why should it be so with regards to the Sabbath? And if one is going to include the Sabbath, then why not also include the New Moons and Festival observances as well? Of course, all those who have already thought about all of this have determined that the “Sabbath” Paul is referring to, is not the Saturday Sabbath, but only the rest-days (also referred to as “Sabbaths”) in the Festivals; and so those particular Sabbaths, along with the New Moons and Festivals, have been abrogated. And, of course, they also conveniently believe this with regards to circumcision...and rightly so! But like I said, the answer to the third argument above proves that Paul was in fact referring to the seventh-day Sabbath. So it is a moot point to consider whether or not Paul is saying it is with regards to salvation or not. Even the argument that “the Sabbaths” (plural) can only refer to the Festival rest-days and not to the Saturday “Sabbath” (singular) has been proven to be false; so the Sabbatarians really don't have a leg to stand on. All of the Old Testament celebrations in Paul’s list either stand or fall together; and since the Sabbath in all these cases is indeed the Saturday Sabbath, the house of cards that the Sabbatarians have tried to erect will not stand up to the breath of God’s own Word on this matter.

V. Some Miscellaneous Verses:

Isa. 56:6-7:

And foreigners who bind themselves to the LORD to serve Him, to love the name of the LORD, and to worship Him, all who keep the Sabbath without desecrating it and who hold fast to My covenant—these I will bring to My holy mountain and give them joy in My house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and sacrifices will be accepted on My altar; for My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations.

If this proves that Gentiles must keep a literal seventh-day Sabbath under the New Covenant which is supposedly in a future, literal Messianic reign of Christ, then it also proves that they must offer literal “burnt offerings” and “sacrifices” upon a literal “altar” of God. Now either this applies to the Old Testament Jewish age and to those Gentile proselytes who embraced Judaism and who were also required to be circumcised (Ex. 12:48), or this all applies to Christ’s kingdom now here on earth. If the latter is true, then all the terms “Sabbath,” “altar,” “burnt-offerings,” “sacrifice,” “My house,” “My holy mountain,” etc., are all to be understood in a figurative manner. For all of God’s children now no longer do any of these things; nor are they to literally do them with Jews in the future. Remember, the “shadows” have been “discarded” no less by God himself.

Most of the older commentator’s view all of these things in Isaiah here in a figurative manner and see here the spiritual realities that are found in Christ during the Church age, using accommodative terms employed by Jewish idealisms that are portrayed as types and shadows. And the New Testament writers often apply many of the passages in the Old Testament, which on the surface seem to speak to ethnic Israel, to the Church. Again, a classic example of this is where Peter applies an Old Testament passage in Exodus 19:6 concerning Israel becoming a kingdom of priests and a holy nation, to the body of Christ (or the Church), who are God's "chosen people" (v. 9) and the spiritual Israel of God who are born not after the flesh. Clearly, in Exodus God said what He meant; but under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit Peter reveals to us what God actually meant by what He said. The Church will never revert back to the “shadows” now that the body, Christ, is here. We no longer observe cast “shadows,” and no longer do we stand in the supposed shade of those shadows; on the contrary, we now stand directly in the light, even as Christ is in the light. And by now all of this should become even more “self-evident” to all of us when viewed in this light.

Isa. 58 (esp. vv. 12-13):

Your people will rebuild the ancient ruins and will raise up the age-old foundations; you will be called Repairer of Broken Walls, Restorer of Streets with Dwellings. If you keep your feet from breaking the Sabbath and from doing as you please on My holy day, if you call the Sabbath a delight and the Lord’s holy day honorable, and if you honor it by not going your own way and not doing as you please or speaking idle words…

Often in the OT God calls the Jewish people to reform their lax ways in keeping the Sabbath, as well as in other things. This, to me, just simply seems to be another one of those cases. Nothing more can really be gathered from these passages. When they fasted, they were to do so with the proper attitude and heart. They were to observe His laws, and especially His Sabbath, which they were accustomed to desecrating all of the time.

Isa. 66:23:

"From one New Moon to another and from one Sabbath to another, all mankind will come and bow down before me," says the LORD.

According to Sabbatarians, verse 22 shows that the Sabbath will be kept in the future, thus it remains perpetual and should be kept now. But the text says the same thing about the “New Moon.” If this is a proof text for keeping the Sabbath, then it is also a proof text for keeping the New Moon, and for which Paul specifically gave no such commandment regarding either of them in Col. 2:16. Therefore, a more excellent way to understanding this verse in Isaiah is to understand it also in a figurative manner. In verse 18 of Isaiah 66 here, it is said to be a time, even now, when God is gathering all nations and tongues to come and see His glory. In verse 19 the Lord will set His people as “signs” among these nations; they are the “survivors” of His indignation in verse 17, such as His first Jewish disciples, who are sent to these nations. And in verse 19 this band of “survivors” is said to be sent “to the distant coastlands that have never heard of His fame or seen His glory”; and that “they [the survivors] will declare My glory among the nations.” In verse 20, “they shall bring all your brethren [the Gentiles] from all the nations as a grain offering to the Lord on horses, chariots, in litters, on mules and on camels [i.e., from the least to the greatest; and from the poorest to the richest] to My mountain Jerusalem.” And then in verse 21, the Lord also says He will take some these from these nations “for priests and for Levites.” (see also Isa. 61:6 in context; also read Jer. 33:18 and the verses before and after this verse for the same idea that is being presented to us in Isa. 66:21 above). As we can very well see in all of these verses, everything that use to be done and understood literally now takes on a spiritual meaning. And the same can be said for Zechariah 14:16-21 which also talks about many from all the nations in the future (in our day right now) observing “the Feast of Tabernacles.”

Now we know that Jesus was repeatedly talking like this in all of His sermons and speeches, and for which everyone constantly misunderstood Him. He spoke and taught just like He spoke and taught in the OT through His prophets who were noted above. And Christ has clearly begun to instruct us on how things are to be understood both now and in the future. And He weaned His disciples away from a natural understanding of things, unto a spiritual understanding of those things. I have counted over 20 times in the gospel of John where Jesus repeatedly talked like this using natural metaphors, concepts and ideas. And His use of all of this figurative speech, that He used in a similar manner in the OT, should not leave any of us doubting anymore of how these things are to be understood today in the Church. After His resurrection, and before departing to sit at the right hand of the Father, even Christ told His disciples, “Though I have been speaking figuratively, a time is coming when I will no longer use this kind of language but will tell you plainly about my Father” (Jhn. 16:25). What is important here to notice is that Christ admits that He had indeed spoken in a “figurative” manner. Clearly, Jesus used words in a “figurative” manner that were NOT to be taken literally. And just because He speaks and explains things more "plainly" at times, still doesn’t discount the fact that He often spoke “figuratively,” and sometimes without even John giving us the sense or meaning of what Christ was actually saying. But even John sometimes helps us to understand all of this new way of speaking to us by sometimes explaining to us what Jesus meant, such as when Jesus talked about destroying the temple in three days. Otherwise, if not for John explaining to us what Christ meant by this, we would all be probably still scratching our heads and taking Christ’s words literally verbatim, just like many did back then with His words.

Now, one of the most profound examples of this way of speaking, is when Jesus was talking about John the Baptist who was in prison. Jesus said, “For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John. And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come. He who has ears, let him hear” (Mat. 11:13-15). Just as John the Baptist was no less Elijah who was to come, we too are no less the priests and Levites that the Lord said in Isaiah above He would make of some of us whom He gathers from the nations. Sadly, there are still some today who are not willing to accept this statement of Christ about John the Baptist, let alone what I just said about us being the priests or Levites that God is referring to. And if Jesus had not explained this prophecy in Malachi for us, we would definitely of had a hard time explaining this one to anyone that it was referring to John the Baptist. And if not for Christ explaining this to us in this manner, I don’t think any of us would have really got it. So here is a classic example of where something in the OT is not to be understood by a so-called “literal” hermeneutic. Such “rules,” as good as they may seem to be at times, will just not allow us to understand the sense of anything that is to be understood in a spiritual manner. And this is exactly what this man-made rule has done to many people ; it has tactically and deceitfully led many down the wrong path. As such, it allows no room for the Spirit of God to give the sense of what He is saying to us by comparing Scripture with Scripture, but only causes someone to interpret the Scriptures by giving their own natural, literal, carnal and earthly sense upon the text (such as the locusts in Revelation that Hal Lindsey said were modern-day stinger helicopters used by America). And this is EXACTLY why Jesus said, “He who has ears, let him ear.” Not everyone has these kind of “ears” to hear. Such people have not by reason of use had their senses exercised to discern between what is truth as opposed to what is error; between that which is natural verses that which is spiritual. And while they should be teachers, they have need that someone teach them again about these elementary principles and teachings about Christ, as found in the OT writings.

Jesus was not talking about understanding all of these things with a natural ear or mindset, but with a mindset that has been transformed and able to compare as Paul declares, “spiritual truths with spiritual words” (I Cor. 13:14). If Paul can say in 1Cor. 5:7 that, “Christ our Passover has been sacrificed for us,” then why can’t we say with just as much force and vigor, “Christ our Feast of Firstfruits is now realized in us”; or that “Christ our Sabbath has now come,” and that we now continue to observe “the Sabbath” by the fact that we have ceased from our own works for our justification and now rest in Christ’s finished work. Even the Feast of Firstfruits is being “fleshed-out” in the fact that the Church is actually the two-tenths of an ephah of fine flour which was made into two leavened wheat loaves in Lev. 23:17, signifying that both Jews and Gentiles are waved before the Lord and now also to be considered as “a kind of firstfruits of God’s creatures” (Jam. 1:18). And why not even say “Christ our Feast of Tabernacles has come,” and that He is now tabernacling among us while we sojourn here in this wilderness prior to entering our promised “heavenly country” or land in Heb. 11:16. So make no bones about it, Paul said all the Feasts (or festivals) are now but dim “shadows,” while the realities of those shadows have all been fulfilled and realized in the work of Christ. I cannot begin to tell you at this time what observing the New Moon spiritually means for us. But I can tell you this much, if God says His kingdom people will be observing it, then it too is only to be realized somehow spiritually in the person and work of Christ. We know beyond all doubt that Christ fulfilled many of these other feasts spiritually speaking, so why can’t we believe that we are to understand this in the same manner as with all of these other feasts? I can tell you that what we do know for certain, is this: that these “shadows” have been discarded and that the spiritual realities of all these things is somehow to be found in Christ. Christ is all, in all.

By now it should come as no surprise to us what Christ meant when He said, "he who has an ear, let him ear." It is hearing and seeing things NOT in a natural way, but in a spiritual way. And John the Baptist being Elijah who was to come is a scathing rebuke and testament to this fact.

Additionally, for a more in-depth study of The Feast of Tabernacles, and its application for us today, please click here.

Lke. 23:56:

Then they went home and prepared spices and perfumes. But they rested on the Sabbath in obedience to the commandment.

The fact that Jewish Christians kept the Sabbath before and after the resurrection is no proof that it is required of us today. After the Jews became Christians the author of Hebrews informs us that they had a hard time leaving these first elementary teachings about Christ, because their senses were not exercised enough to understand the spiritual realities behind them (Heb. 5:11-4; 6:1-2). Even Peter needed a mild rebuke from Paul for his hypocrisy of avoiding being seen eating with Gentiles. Similarly, the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 encountered some of these issues, especially with regards to circumcision. So the fact that these women observed the Sabbath during the ministry of Christ, we can understand that they were only doing what they were suppose to do, as any Jew would do who was still under the Law of Moses while that covenant was still in force.

Mat. 24:20:

Pray that your flight will not take place in winter or on the Sabbath.

Long journeys were prohibited by the law on the Sabbath. Some suppose the distance allowed to go was about a mile. Most of the Jews held that it was not lawful to go any further, even under circumstances of war or affliction. And it was not practical to travel on the Sabbath, as the gates were kept closed for anyone to go in or out of the city (Neh. 13:19-22).

The function of Jesus’ words was to emphasize, not the mandatory observance upon His disciples that would still be in effect by all unbelieving Jews pending the destruction of Jerusalem, but the extreme circumstances that would not allow them to escape from the city due to the judgment that was to come in 70 AD.

The mention of possible inabilities by the Lord presents to the mind physical restrictions that would keep His disciples from leaving. The gates being shut to the city was one obstacle, the harsh cold and wet winters would be another. Jesus was not putting His stamp of approval on the continued observance of the Sabbath by His disciples, but as the Good Shepherd that He was, He could see future difficulties lying ahead which could present themselves to His sheep, and as the Good Shepherd who watches out for his flock, He was going “before them” so-to-speak in seeing the difficulties that lay ahead, and exhorting them in advance “to pray” that these difficulties would not prohibit them from being able to flee the city. Satan's job was to hinder them and to kill them. Praying would possibly relieve them of such difficulties. And as history affords us the details, the Christians escaped with their very lives intact to the regions of Pella, just before Jerusalem was overtaken by the Roman armies.

Adam Clarke succinctly writes here: “Neither on the Sabbath-day. That you may not raise the indignation of the Jews by traveling on that day, and so suffer that death out of the city which you had endeavored to escape from within” (Commentary on the Bible, p. 818). Not only would Christ's first Jewish disciples die by the hands of their own countrymen for traveling on the Sabbath, but the gates being closed would also curtail any escape and render their lives inescapable from Roman hands.

Concluding Remarks:

John Calvin amazingly has this to say with regards to keeping the fourth commandment of the Decalogue:

…this commandment stands in peculiar circumstances apart from the others, the mode of exposition must be somewhat different. Early Christian writers are wont to call it typical, as containing the external observance of a day which was abolished with the other types on the advent of Christ. This is indeed true….there can be no doubt, that, on the advent of our Lord Jesus Christ, the ceremonial part of the commandment was abolished. He is the truth, at whose presence all the emblems banish; the body, at the sight of which the shadows disappear. He, I say, is the true completion of the Sabbath…. Christians, therefore, should have nothing to do with a superstitious observance of days….

The Sabbath being abrogated, there is still room among us, first, to assemble on stated days for the hearing of the Word, the breaking of the mystical bread, and public prayer….It being expedient to overthrow superstition, the Jewish holyday was abolished; and as a thing necessary to retain decency, order, and peace, in the Church, another day was appointed for that purpose….

We do not celebrate it [the Lord’s Day] with most minute formality, as a ceremony by which we imagine that a spiritual mystery is typified, but we adopt it as a necessary remedy for preserving order in the Church….And he [Paul] tells the Romans that it is superstitious to make one day differ from another (Rom. xiv. 5).

I do not cling so to the number seven as to bring the Church under bondage to it, nor do I condemn churches for holding their meetings on other solemn days, provided they guard against superstition….In this way, we get quit of the trifling of the false prophets, who in later times instilled Jewish ideas into the people, alleging that nothing was abrogated but what was ceremonial in the commandment…while the moral part remains—viz. the observance of one day in seven. But this is nothing else than to insult the Jews, by changing the day, and yet mentally attributing to it the same sanctity; thus retaining the same typical distinction of days as had place among the Jews. And of a truth, we see what profit they have made by such a doctrine. Those who cling to their constitutions go thrice as far as the Jews in the gross and carnal superstition of sabbatism… (Institutes of the Christian Religion, vol. 1, pp. 339-344).

Reformed expositor, Michael Horton, also notes concerning the ten commandments,

The ceremonial and civil commandments is reissued in one way or another, many times over, in the New Testament—with one exception, the fourth commandment (The Law of Perfect Freedom. Chicago: Moody Press, 1993, pp. 125-126).

The Sabbath as a “sign” for the Israelites, was mandated ONLY to them and for them under their old covenant with God. The fact that it would be “forever” was only in the sense as has already been outlined above: That when any of them were to be converted to Christ, they would "forever" be observing this “shadow” or “copy” in the person and work of Christ.

God had said to Moses to tell only the Jews under their old covenant with God:

…Say to the Israelites, 'You must observe My Sabbaths. This will be a sign between Me and you…The Israelites are to observe the Sabbath,…It will be a sign between Me and the Israelites forever…” (Ex. 31:13, 16, 17). “Also I gave them My Sabbaths as a sign between us…Keep My Sabbaths holy, that they may be a sign between us (Ezk. 20:12, 20).

The Gentiles knew of no such ordinance, and it surely wasn’t something written on their consciences as a moral duty or obligation before God. The “Sabbath” is not an inbred moral duty of the conscience, but an outward ceremony that was to be observed by the covenant community of Israel; and, as such, they became “morally obligated” before God to keep it.

By definition, what is “moral,” is simply this: Morals are principles (commands) or habits (conscience) with respect to right or wrong conduct. “Morals refers to generally accepted customs of conduct and right living in a society, and to the individual’s practice in relation to these”
(http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/moral).

If the United States Government commands us to pay taxes, then we are, by the definition of term “moral” above, morally obligated to the government to pay those taxes. They are the “principles” of what is a proper conduct as set forth by the government, and do not violate our conscience as such. Even Jesus said, “render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s.” It was “morally” right to do so. Jesus did not consider it to be an immoral practice for us to do and whereby we should refuse to pay our taxes. Additionally being commanded to observe the Sabbath was not imposing upon the Jews something that we ourselves would consider to be “immoral” for us as Christians to do; and as such it became only their moral obligation to do. In fact, when you think about it, every command from God which is specifically designated for us to do, whether we be Jews or Christians, is morally obligated for us to do. There is nothing commanded of God that is immoral or, amoral.

Again, whatever laws the Jews were "morally" obligated to keep didn’t necessarily make them "morally" right for everyone outside of their community to keep. The Gentiles were not being “immoral” for not observing the Sabbath that was strictly given to Israel as a covenant community to "morally" keep before God.. So to say that the ten commandments are the everlasting, binding and "unchanging moral laws of God" is a misnomer. All the laws were "morally" binding upon the Jews under their old covenant with God. One, five, or ten were no more “moral” than the rest of all the commandments, statutes and ordinances.

John G. Reisinger succinctly and wisely notes,

“The Bible defines moral duty according to the laws of the specific covenant under which an individual lives and never by an imaginary code of ‘unchanging moral law’” (Tablets of Stone, Southbridge, MA: Crowne Pub. Inc., 1989, p. 27).

Under our new covenant with God, we have our own morally binding laws or commands. With a changing of the covenants (or "of the guard" so-to-speak) there has been a change of laws. And to this no one would deny. For example, when we leave the United Kingdom (England), for America, the laws of England no longer apply to us. We are now under the laws of the United States of America.

Similarly, this is the case with us being under our new Lord and husband, the Lord Jesus Christ, in contradistinction to us no longer being under the Jews former husband, the Law of Moses, just as Paul says in Romans:

Do you not know, brothers—for I am speaking to men [to Jewish brethren] who know the law—that the law has authority [Gk. kurios, Lordship] over a man only as long as he lives? For example, by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law of marriage. So then, if she marries another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress, even though she marries another man. So, my brothers, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another” (Rom. 7:1-4).

All Jews in Christ have been separated by death from their former husband and Taskmaster (or Lord) “the law,” and are now married or "joined" to another Lord, namely, Christ. Yet all such believers in Christ are “not free from God’s law, but under Christ’s law” (I Cor. 9:21), as instructed by Christ and His apostles' to follow according to the commandments as laid out by them. And so Jesus himself said,

“Therefore every teacher of the law who has been instructed about the kingdom of heaven is like the owner of a house who brings out of his storeroom new treasures as well as old” (Mat. 13:52).

Even with the changing of the priesthood, there is of necessity, “a changing of the law” (Heb. 7:12). And there are those who attempt “to be teachers of the Law, even though they do not understand either what they are saying or the matters about which they make confident assertions. But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully,” (I Tim. 1:8, NAS). Sadly, many are not using it "lawfully." They are not rightly-dividing or, literally, in the Greek, “cutting” the Word of Truth. They are “cutting” it up to suit their own a priori theological biases and traditions. Like the Jews in Paul’s day, it is possible (just possible) that some of these people in the Church who try to impose the Sabbath upon us are no more the true circumcision, or the Church, than "the concision" or "the mutilators of the flesh" (Php. 3:2) in Paul's day? They are in fact legalist’s that do not rightly “cut” the Word of Truth, emphasizing “cutting” in all the wrong places, and who only form schisms within the body and desire to glory in their flesh; and who lay heavy burdens upon people that neither they nor their forefathers were able to bear. They are dissecting the Word of God in a manner that the Word of God does not support or buttress. They are like the blind leading the blind, with them both falling into the same fallacious and dark ditch.

The true light has dawned, the reality of Christ has been revealed. Moses must decrease, and Christ must increase. Moses’ law was not that light, but was but a dim shadow of that light that truly lights every man that comes into the world. Christ is our Day-Star that is to arise in our hearts, expelling all of those dark shadows. For we now look directly into the Sun of Righteousness and see Him face to face. The “shadows” are gone, His radiant glory is before us and upon us. And we now walk in the light as He is in the light. What was once inscribed in stone as outward rules, regulations and ceremonial rites has now become inscribed into our very hearts as an inward reality, and as a life-giving Spirit. The outward, physical “sign” of rest and a cessation from all of our works in the fourth commandment has become the inward spiritual reality and realization of a life and rest that now resides deep down within every believer's soul; and all that was righteous, holy and true in the other nine commandments is the inward fruit of that life and rest that is both pleasing to God and to others. Truly the ten commandments are a reality that are living, moving and having their very being and breath in our hearts and lives today in the person and work of Jesus Christ.

This concept of us resting in God and He resting in us was intimated throughout the Old Testament. In 1Chr. 28:2, David talked about plans “to build a house as a place of rest for the ark of the covenant of the Lord,” a type of that which was to come in our bodies, God’s temple. This was even alluded to when Stephen declared of the Lord, “What kind of house will you build for Me?…Or where will My resting place be?” (Acts 7:49). Clearly it was to be in a temple made without hands. He in us, and us in Him (Jhn. 17:20-23). And Heb. 4:11 declares we are to “make every effort to enter that rest.” “For anyone who enters God’s rest also rests from his own work, just as God did from His” (v. 10). “Now we who have believed enter that rest” (v. 3). Hallelujah!

Psm. 37:7 says, “Rest in the Lord.” Psm. 116:7 also says, “Be at rest once more, Oh my soul!” And Isaiah cried, “This is the resting place, let the weary rest; and this is the place of repose…” (30:15). In Isaiah 28:12, the Lord again says, “in repentance and rest is your salvation, in quietness and trust is your strength.” And Jeremiah 6:16 likewise states: “This is what the LORD says: ‘Stand at the crossroads and look; ask for the ancient paths, ask where the good way is, and walk in it, and you will find rest for your souls…’” 1Pet. 4:14 also declares, “For the Spirit of God rests on you.” And, finally, in Num. 11:25 it says the Spirit of God “rested on them…”

Clearly “a Sabbath of rest” shadow under the Old Covenant, has given place to “a Sabbath-rest” spiritual reality and realization under our New Covenant. And, truly, the “body [the reality] is of Christ” (Col. 2:16).

Ex. 31:15 has said that “for six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD.” Ex. 35:2 repeats this by saying: “…a Sabbath of rest to the LORD." And Lev. 16:31 reiterates that, “It is a sabbath of rest, and you must deny yourselves; it is a lasting ordinance.” Lev. 23:3 likewise has stated: “There are six days when you may work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of rest, a day of sacred assembly. You are not to do any work.” And finally, the NT writer in Hebrews 4:9 under the inspiration of the the Holy Spirit writes: “There remaineth therefore a sabbath-rest for the people of God” (ASV). The similarities in wording here between the old and new covenants is quite striking. Clearly, all of this was by Divine design. And may the honor go to Jesus to have the last word on all this in Mat. 11:28-30:

“Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light” (NIV).