Let's talk about Colossians 2:16
Donna Kupp
Whenever the question of the Sabbath is discussed, those
who do not keep it holy will inevitably appeal to Colossians
2:16 as their authority for disobeying the fourth
commandment of God.
What exactly did Paul mean when he wrote:
"Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or
in respect of a holyday, or of the new moon, or of the
Sabbath days:" (KJV)
Yes, when Paul said "Sabbaths" he meant the seventh day
Sabbath - but that does not mean that Paul was canceling
the requirement for obedience to a commandment of God.
What God has commanded only God can set aside. One
may search the New Testament for a thousand years and he
will not find a single verse that says God has abrogated one
"jot or tittle" of His fourth commandment.
What then was Paul talking about when he said to let no
man judge you in respect of Sabbaths? When we look at
this verse in its context it soon becomes apparent that Paul
was warning about the "Colossian Heresy" which was
another gospel based on asceticism and the worship of
angels in order to gain assistance from cosmic powers. The
essence of this heresy was that Christ alone was not
sufficient to deliver us from our slavery to sin.
As you will see from the following verses, Paul was warning
against three things that were being added to the gospel.
1. Traditions of men.
2. The worship of angels.
3. Submitting to doctrines of men.
COL 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy
and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the
rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
COL 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in
drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon,
or of the Sabbath days:
COL 2:18 Let no man beguile you of your reward in a
voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into
those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his
fleshly mind,
COL 2:20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the
rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world,
are ye subject to ordinances, (Touch not; taste not; handle
not; Which all are to perish with the using;) AFTER THE
COMMANDMENTS AND DOCTRINES OF MEN?
KEEPING THE SABBATH DAY HOLY IS NOT A
DOCTRINE OF MEN!
Paul was not doing away with God's commandment; he was
warning against the false teachers who were saying that if
believers did not eat and drink the right food and keep the
festivals, new moons and Sabbaths ACCORDING TO CERTAIN
HUMAN REGULATIONS they would lose their reward.
According to verse :23 below, they were teaching that
without these ascetic regulations one could not overcome
the flesh:
COL 2:23 These [DOCTRINES OF MEN] have indeed
an appearance of wisdom in promoting rigor of devotion
and self-abasement and severity to the body, but they are of
no value in checking the indulgence of the flesh. (RSV)
One commentator summed up these verses by saying:
"We conclude then that in verse :16, the warning is not
against the Sabbath, festivals and dietary laws as such, but
rather against those who promote these practices as
indispensable aids to Christian perfection and as needed
protection from the 'elements [evil spiritual forces] of the
world' thus denying the all sufficiency of Christ."
(Samuele Bacchiocchi, From Sabbath To Sunday)
Now really, doesn't that explanation make a lot more sense
than the notion that Christians are no longer required to
obey the fourth commandment? It is a true saying that:
"The commandment is not nullified by the condemnation of
its abuse.".
The question we need to ask is this: "Was Paul condemning
the Sabbath day, or was he CONDEMNING THE
DOCTRINES OF MEN who added ritualistic and ascetic
restrictions to faith in Christ?"
In order to answer that dispute, one must look
at the broad picture. There is not a single verse in the
New Testament which states that Paul taught a new doctrine
that canceled the Sabbath commandment; nor is there any
record of a controversy between the Jews and Gentile
Christians over Sabbath-keeping. If Paul had been teaching
that the Sabbath commandment had been repealed, it would
have split the church wide open and he would have had to
answer the objections continuously in his epistles.
Think about it - if the Jewish believers made such a fuss
about circumcision being optional, imagine what they would
have said about the Sabbath day being revoked.
At some point we must use common sense and reason to
interpret what has been written. For example, does "Let no
man judge you in meat and drink..." mean that Christians
can be drunkards? Of course not, because you know that
God's word forbids drunkenness. Well, it also forbids
Sabbath-breaking!
It is only logical to assume that if God was going to cancel
one of His commandments, he would make that fact very clear.
Surely, if someone said to you: "Let no man judge you in
respect of murder or adultery" you would not assume that
God had changed His mind about those sins without solid
proof. Certainly, you would demand more evidence than
one lonely verse in the book of Colossians. Or would you?
Donna Kupp
NOTE:
In addition to the Greek and Latin manuscripts of the New
Testament, there is a third text called the Peshitta. The
Peshitta is from ancient Eastern manuscripts written in
Aramaic, the natural language of Jesus. Hebrews 4:9 in the
Peshitta text reads:
"It is therefore the duty of the people of God to keep the
Sabbath."
dk
I am not a Seventh Day Adventist (and never have been), a natural
Jew, or a Catholic. I am simply the least of Christ's brethren who
love Him and keep His Commandments.
The Seven Deadly Deceptions Of Counterfeit Christianity
http://www.freetruth.info
Ike E 12/10/2009
"Donna Kupp" <dk...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:fbb61886-c4a1-49e1...@g4g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
> COLOSSIANS 2:16
>
> Whenever the question of the Sabbath is discussed, those
> who do not keep it holy will inevitably appeal to Colossians
> 2:16 as their authority for disobeying the fourth
> commandment of God.
>
> What exactly did Paul mean when he wrote:
>
> "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or
> in respect of a holyday, or of the new moon, or of the
> Sabbath days:" (KJV)
Thanks, but Paul explains himself just fine, a fact which you legalistic
Pharisee types ignore...
Rom 14:5-7
One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day
alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth
the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to
the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he
giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and
giveth God thanks. For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to
himself.
[snip the rest of the "Talmudic" revisionism]
Ike
vince garcia
>
> COLOSSIANS 2:16
>
> Whenever the question of the Sabbath is discussed, those
> who do not keep it holy will inevitably appeal to Colossians
> 2:16 as their authority for disobeying the fourth
> commandment of God.
>
> What exactly did Paul mean when he wrote:
>
> "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or
> in respect of a holyday, or of the new moon, or of the
> Sabbath days:" (KJV)
>
> Yes, when Paul said "Sabbaths" he meant the seventh day
> Sabbath - but that does not mean that Paul was canceling
> the requirement for obedience to a commandment of God.
Uh, no, Donna. Paul did that back in galatians, where he rebukes the
galaytians for keeping ALL FOUR FORMS of the sabbath, including the
sabbath days:
Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.
I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain.
Or, if a paraphrase would help:
You are (unnecessarily and legalistically) observing (Sabbath) days,
Jewish New Moon (Sabbaths), Jewish Festival (Sabbaths), and (even
Sabbath) years!
I am starting to think I wasted my time with you.
Being a heretic, you'll try to use scripture to refute scripture, and
quote something from the old testament or the book of acts showing paul
preached on the sabbath so he meant for us to keep it, but you've been
here long enough, and we've all done a good enough job showing you up
for what you are: a totally unqualified person who can quote a bunch of
verses like a parrot, with no understanding at all of what the Bible
actually teaches.
So again--you say one thing, and the scripture contradicts you and
teaches something else
> What God has commanded only God can set aside.
Really? Where did GOD set aside the command to be physically
circumcised, which is called an EVERLASTING COVENANT that existed
before, during and after the LAw was given?
Can you give me a verse where GOD, rather than paul and a COUNCIL, did
that?
Afraid to answer that question?
Donna Kupp
> Donna Kupp wrote:
>
> > COLOSSIANS 2:16
>
> > Whenever the question of the Sabbath is discussed, those
> > who do not keep it holy will inevitably appeal to Colossians
> > 2:16 as their authority for disobeying the fourth
> > commandment of God.
>
> > What exactly did Paul mean when he wrote:
>
> > "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or
> > in respect of a holyday, or of the new moon, or of the
> > Sabbath days:" (KJV)
>
> > Yes, when Paul said "Sabbaths" he meant the seventh day
> > Sabbath - but that does not mean that Paul was canceling
> > the requirement for obedience to a commandment of God.
>
> Uh, no, Donna. Paul did that back in galatians, where he rebukes the
> galaytians for keeping ALL FOUR FORMS of the sabbath, including the
> sabbath days:
>
> Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.
> I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain.
Dear Reader:
I refer you to day's post: "Let's talk about Galatians 4:10-11
Donna Kupp
http://www.keepandshare.com/doc/show.php?i=630302&cat=0
1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist
On Dec 19, 4:24 am, vince garcia <vggarci...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> Donna Kupp wrote:
>
> > COLOSSIANS 2:16
>
> > Whenever the question of the Sabbath is discussed, those
> > who do not keep it holy will inevitably appeal to Colossians
> > 2:16 as their authority for disobeying the fourth
> > commandment of God.
>
> > What exactly did Paul mean when he wrote:
>
> > "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or
> > in respect of a holyday, or of the new moon, or of the
> > Sabbath days:" (KJV)
>
> > Yes, when Paul said "Sabbaths" he meant the seventh day
> > Sabbath - but that does not mean that Paul was canceling
> > the requirement for obedience to a commandment of God.
>
> Uh, no, Donna. Paul did that back in galatians, where he rebukes the
> galaytians for keeping ALL FOUR FORMS of the sabbath, including the
> sabbath days:
Err! the "DAYS" should not be included as it is in Italics and has been
added in.
It should read.....
"Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or
in respect of a holyday, or of the new moon, or of the
Sabbath " (KJV)
__
Veff...
--
Disclaimer:
I am no man's personal enemy in merely secular matters.
But when they approach me on the premises of the Truth as was taught and
practised in the 1st Century, then they are either my friends or my foes,
and I am theirs.
I am their friends for the Truth's sake, or I am their foe for the Truth's
sake.
Indeed, the most dangerous enemies to Christ are those who pretend to be his
friends, but are not faithful to his doctrine or the doctrine of his
ordained
Apostles.
<*{{{{{><
Fred A Stover
\
Again, you worship the devil. Ignoring the fact that it has nothing to do
with which sabbath is kept, or its keeping being a blessing instead of being
condemned for not keeping it.
The problem with your devil-worship. Like the legalists Jesus confronted,
you worship the devil's hinderances to salvation over God's mercy: "Woe
unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to
make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child
of hell than yourselves" (Matt 23:15)
You deceive people into ignoring the fact that there are two parties
involved in the affairs of men, such as the giving of the law (Job 1). And
you deceive people into believing the impediments to salvation (Is 1:12)
and doctrines of devils (1Tim 4:1-4) were added to the law by God.
You don't know the Lord. If you knew the Lord, you would know that there
was only one commandment in the garden which the devil used to tempt Adam,
and it is no longer a commandment when we have been restored in the new
earth. She would know that the devil's condemnations in the given law do not
apply to believers in Christ (Rom 8:1) for the Church is resurrected before
the judgment to reign and judge with Christ in the millennial world to come
"the saints shall judge the world" (1Cor 6:2): "I saw thrones, and they sat
upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them
that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and
which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received
his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned
with Christ a thousand years (but the rest of the dead lived not again until
the thousand years were finished). This is the first resurrection" (Rev
20:4-5).
You deny Christ reducing all in Him from judges to co-defendents with the
world. It is you who willfully sins, for having been warned of your heresy
you persisted in speaking against the Author of scripture, the Holy Spirit:
"A man that is an heretic after the first and second admonition reject;
knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of
himself" (Tit 3:10-11): "whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man,
it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it
shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to
come" (Matt 12:32).
--
His,
More @ www.selah-tx.net
ho echon ota akoueto Preparing the way of the
Lord
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Verily I say unto you, Whosoever
shall not receive the kingdom of God
as a little child, he shall not enter therein.
(Mark 10:15)
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
<)))))))><
Donna Kupp
Hello Veff,
I agree with you. It should read "...or of the Sabbath" (KJV)
Harold and I dealt with the mis-translation here:
> > Yes, when Paul said "Sabbaths" he meant the seventh day
> > Sabbath - but that does not mean that Paul was canceling
> > the requirement for obedience to a commandment of God.
Thank you for calling attention to the translator's error.
Donna
Donna Kupp
wrote:
Dear Reader,
I refer you to: Let's talk about Romans 14:5-6 that I posted today.
Donna Kupp
v1_0
> COLOSSIANS 2:16
>
> Whenever the question of the Sabbath is discussed, those
> who do not keep it holy will inevitably appeal to Colossians
> 2:16 as their authority for disobeying the fourth
> commandment of God.
Perhaps amongst other verses.
Would it surprise you if I said that Jesus broke the Sabbath?
My favorite verse on the matter is Mark 2:27-28. Particularly 27.
" 27: And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man
for the sabbath:
"28": Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath. "
The sabbath is another gift. The jews turned it into "work". (They
had to work real hard to keep all the strictures they had about the
sabbath).
-V
Ike E 12/22/2009
[snip]
> I refer you to: Let's talk about Romans 14:5-6 that I posted today.
Why?
You're satanically corrupting that text just as you satanically corrupt
every other text, legalist.
Jesus removed the burden of the law from those who keep the faith.
You attempt to put it back on, Satan.
Every REAL church knows this, which is why you people had to go slither off
and form your separatist cult.
Ike
Donna Kupp
Hello V,
Jesus didn't profane the sabbath. Since he gave the commandment
on Mount Sinai, he knew how to keep it. You are right when you said
the Jews turned it into "work".
I will add: then, when Jesus didn't conform to their traditions, they
slandered him. Rightly kept, the sabbath is a delight.
Donna Kupp
http://www.keepandshare.com/doc/show.php?i=630302&cat=0
Ike E 12/22/2009
On Dec 21, 2:09 pm, v1_0 <v...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 18, 10:13 pm, Donna Kupp <dk...@charter.net> wrote:
>
> > COLOSSIANS 2:16
>
> > Whenever the question of the Sabbath is discussed, those
> > who do not keep it holy will inevitably appeal to Colossians
> > 2:16 as their authority for disobeying the fourth
> > commandment of God.
>
> Perhaps amongst other verses.
>
> Would it surprise you if I said that Jesus broke the Sabbath?
>
> My favorite verse on the matter is Mark 2:27-28. Particularly 27.
>
> " 27: And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man
> for the sabbath:
> "28": Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath. "
>
> The sabbath is another gift.
That's because Jesus was the FULFILLMENT of the law, dimwit, and He didn't
because WE COULDN'T.
> The jews turned it into "work".
Which is precisely what YOU'RE DOING, TOO, dimwit: Making A WORK the basis
of salvation.
[snippeth]
Ike
v1_0
> On Dec 21, 2:09 pm, v1_0 <v...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 18, 10:13 pm, Donna Kupp <dk...@charter.net> wrote:
>
> > > COLOSSIANS 2:16
>
> > > Whenever the question of the Sabbath is discussed, those
> > > who do not keep it holy will inevitably appeal to Colossians
> > > 2:16 as their authority for disobeying the fourth
> > > commandment of God.
>
> > Perhaps amongst other verses.
>
> > Would it surprise you if I said that Jesus broke the Sabbath?
[...]
>
> Hello V,
>
> Jesus didn't profane the sabbath. Since he gave the commandment
> on Mount Sinai, he knew how to keep it. You are right when you said
> the Jews turned it into "work".
John 5:18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he
not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his
Father, making himself equal with God.
"because he not only had broken the sabbath"
-V