Book Review--Putting the Sabbath to Rest--Col 2:16

[djconklin]

>>Lev 23 shows a clear usages of εορτη used with Yom-Kippur and the Sabbath.

For those who don't yet understand: there is no linkage, or use of, the word "heorte" with the Day of Atonement in Lev 23.

 

[oldsage]

already been there and I disagree with some of the conclusions.

Ron du Preez say my study and sent me an email in which he said that I was the only one who got it right.

That doesn’t make what you wrote correct. One immediate error I saw was saying there were Gnosticism involved. But Gnosticism didn’t exist until the 2nd century.

I disagree.

I went by the actual Greek, I did not start with any presupposition of what I wanted the text to say.

In translation you do not go only by the Greek text but also context and mannerism of the author. Because this also could have connections with things being discussed in Rom 14 and 1Cor 8.[/quote]

I believe it is both.

Lots of people believe things; that doesn't make it so. I prefer to go by the facts.

Many people bring their own “facts” into play. I allow for other interpretations because Paul has been known to bring up the fasting and what someone consumes. You don’t allow for it. For me that is one set of “facts” you leave out.

How do you figure?

I stated why in the study that you said you had read.

Ok, I disagree with you because I believe the Greek has them a separate things and not linked.[/quote]

I looked up the word myself,

That's interesting consiering I'm the first one to have actually proved I looked up the word.

I didn’t say I am the first to look the word up, I searched for the lemma of that word and all its occurrences in the LXX and looked up to see if it was used in conjunction to Yom-Kippur and found it was. Even though many of the times it is linked to the 3 main feast.

 

[oldsage]

>>Lev 23 shows a clear usages of εορτη used with Yom-Kippur and the Sabbath.

For those who don't yet understand: there is no linkage, or use of, the word "heorte" with the Day of Atonement in Lev 23.

Lev 23:4 uses the term and then proceeds to show what those are, Yom-Kippur is included with them.
Then in Lev 23:44 concludes it. Between the two Yom-Kippur is included.

 

[tall73]

Lev 23:4 uses the term and then proceeds to show what those are, Yom-Kippur is included with them.
Then in Lev 23:44 concludes it. Between the two Yom-Kippur is included.

Yeah, I have to say that seems convincing to me.
You also have the Sabbath listed there though, which according to that view would be repeated in the verse in question.

 

[djconklin]

Lev 23:4 uses the term and then proceeds to show what those are, Yom-Kippur is included with them.
Then in Lev 23:44 concludes it. Between the two Yom-Kippur is included.

The Day of Atonement is NOT mentioned in either verse, 2, or 3, or 4. If you read a decent commentary on Lev. 23 you will find that verses 2 & 4 are an "inclusio" (think inverted chiasm). Moses is showing here that the feasts mentioned in the chapter are "sabbaths" --deriving that sabbathness from verse 3.

 

[oldsage]

The Day of Atonement is NOT mentioned in either verse, 2, or 3, or 4. If you read a decent commentary on Lev. 23 you will find that verses 2 & 4 are an "inclusio" (think inverted chiasm). Moses is showing here that the feasts mentioned in the chapter are "sabbaths" --deriving that sabbathness from verse 3.

Maybe you didn't understand what I wrote. In verse 4 it starts by saying "theses are the appointed feast". Then it list all the feast of which Yom-Kippur is included in the list. Then at verse 44 it states, "Thus Moses declared to the people of Israel the appointed feasts of the LORD". This concludes the list. Inbetween is Yom-Kippur. Sabbath is also linked to Yom-Kippur in the text:

ESV Leviticus 23:28 And you shall not do any work on that very day, for it is a Day of Atonement, to make atonement for you before the LORD your God.
ESV Leviticus 23:32 It shall be to you a Sabbath of solemn rest, and you shall afflict yourselves. On the ninth day of the month beginning at evening, from evening to evening shall you keep your Sabbath."

This intimately links it with the Sabbath.

So, it is not far fetched to see that it is an appointed feast and it is a sabbath.

Chris

 

[djconklin]

The Day of Atonement is a day of fasting, not feasting. It is NEVER called a "feast" (heorte) elsewhere in the OT. The Day of Atonement derives its "sabbathness" from the seventh-day Sabbath. Whenever you see a text in the OT listing the religious days of the year the Day of Atonement (and feast of trumpets (a misnomer)) is included under the term "sabbath."

All of the evidence is laid out in my study. I should note that I spent over 2 and half years do nothing but studying those two verses.

 

[oldsage]

The Day of Atonement is a day of fasting, not feasting. It is NEVER called a "feast" (heorte) elsewhere in the OT. The Day of Atonement derives its "sabbathness" from the seventh-day Sabbath. Whenever you see a text in the OT listing the religious days of the year the Day of Atonement (and feast of trumpets (a misnomer)) is included under the term "sabbath."

All of the evidence is laid out in my study. I should note that I spent over 2 and half years do nothing but studying those two verses.

Well, I will just have to disagree with you based on Lev 23.

We obviously are not going to agree on this. My findings are different than yours, this happens in scholarship. So, we are going to have to agree to disagree here.

Chris

 

[djconklin]

My findings are open for all to see. They are, as evidenced by my bibliography, based on the scholarship of the day vs. private interpretation and/or opinion.

"Wood cites the commentary by Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown which noted that the annual sabbaths "of the day of atonement and feast of tabernacles have come to an end with the Jewish services to which they belonged (Leviticus xxiii. 32, 37-39)," but "the weekly Sabbath rests on a more permanent foundation, having been instituted in Paradise to commemorate the completion of creation in six days."13 The J-F-B Commentary states that "sabbatwn" refers to the sabbaths "of the day of atonement and feast of tabernacles".14 Fausset then goes on to state that "Lev xxiii. 38 expressly distinguishes "The Sabbaths of the Lord" from the other Sabbaths."15" see http://www.666man.net/Colossians_2_16-17_By_David_Conklin/216d.html

 

[reddogs]

Oldsage,

I have to admit this is a bit deep for me but I talked to a close friend who I consider highly when it comes to the exact/deaper meaning of a text or verse in scripture. He told me that Paul and Peter had to agree to disagree on this issue in the following aspect (strict tradition of the Jews) which Peter just could not get over, as Paul felt the Jews had built up a wall of tradition even against the Sabbath which is what Jesus spoke of in Mark 7:6-9:

6He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.
7Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. 9And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

He felt Paul was not speaking against so much against the weekly Sabbath, but the reams of traditions 'of the elders' that Jews had accumalated on how to worship God even on the weekly Sabbath, which even Peter could not resist as shown by his actions with the uncircumsized Gentile brethren. Thus Paul confronted Peter for following the Jewish traditions or their "letter aspect" of the law they had imposed on everything withing Jewish life including the Sabbath which had made the Sabbath imposible to keep. Jesus had shown them what the Sabbath was meant to be, kept out of love and not forced by the strict Jewish "traditions of the elders" which in my opinion also includes the now fullfilled mosaic laws that were imposed on the Sabbath and this is what Paul is making clear in Galations 2 when he says:If I rebuild what I destroyed, I prove that I am a lawbreaker



Paul Accepted by the Apostles

1Fourteen years later I went up again to Jerusalem, this time with Barnabas. I took Titus along also. 2I went in response to a revelation and set before them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. But I did this privately to those who seemed to be leaders, for fear that I was running or had run my race in vain. 3Yet not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, even though he was a Greek. 4This matter arose because some false brothers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves. 5We did not give in to them for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might remain with you.

6As for those who seemed to be important—whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not judge by external appearance—those men added nothing to my message. 7On the contrary, they saw that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the Gentiles,[a] just as Peter had been to the Jews.[b] 8For God, who was at work in the ministry of Peter as an apostle to the Jews, was also at work in my ministry as an apostle to the Gentiles. 9James, Peter[c] and John, those reputed to be pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the Jews. 10All they asked was that we should continue to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do.

Paul Opposes Peter

11When Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong. 12Before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.
14When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter in front of them all, "You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?

15"We who are Jews by birth and not 'Gentile sinners' 16know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified. 17"If, while we seek to be justified in Christ, it becomes evident that we ourselves are sinners, does that mean that Christ promotes sin? Absolutely not! 18If I rebuild what I destroyed, I prove that I am a lawbreaker. 19For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. 20I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!"[d]

 

[tall73]

I think you are thinking of the law in Galatians passage?

Oldsage,

I have to admit this is a bit deep for me but I talked to a close friend who I consider highly when it comes to the exact/deaper meaning of a text or verse in scripture. He told me that Paul and Peter had to agree to disagree on this issue in the following aspect (strict tradition of the Jews) which Peter just could not get over, as Paul felt the Jews had built up a wall of tradition even against the Sabbath which is what Jesus spoke of in Mark 7:6-9:

6He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.
7Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. 9And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

He felt Paul was not speaking against so much against the weekly Sabbath, but the reams of traditions 'of the elders' that Jews had accumalated on how to worship God even on the weekly Sabbath, which even Peter could not resist as shown by his actions with the uncircumsized Gentile brethren. Thus Paul confronted Peter for following the Jewish traditions or their "letter aspect" of the law they had imposed on everything withing Jewish life including the Sabbath which had made the Sabbath imposible to keep. Jesus had shown them what the Sabbath was meant to be, kept out of love and not forced by the strict Jewish "traditions of the elders" which in my opinion also includes the now fullfilled mosaic laws that were imposed on the Sabbath and this is what Paul is making clear in Galations 2 when he says:If I rebuild what I destroyed, I prove that I am a lawbreaker



Paul Accepted by the Apostles

1Fourteen years later I went up again to Jerusalem, this time with Barnabas. I took Titus along also. 2I went in response to a revelation and set before them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. But I did this privately to those who seemed to be leaders, for fear that I was running or had run my race in vain. 3Yet not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, even though he was a Greek. 4This matter arose because some false brothers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves. 5We did not give in to them for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might remain with you.

6As for those who seemed to be important—whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not judge by external appearance—those men added nothing to my message. 7On the contrary, they saw that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the Gentiles,[a] just as Peter had been to the Jews.[b] 8For God, who was at work in the ministry of Peter as an apostle to the Jews, was also at work in my ministry as an apostle to the Gentiles. 9James, Peter[c] and John, those reputed to be pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the Jews. 10All they asked was that we should continue to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do.

Paul Opposes Peter

11When Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong. 12Before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.
14When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter in front of them all, "You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?

15"We who are Jews by birth and not 'Gentile sinners' 16know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified. 17"If, while we seek to be justified in Christ, it becomes evident that we ourselves are sinners, does that mean that Christ promotes sin? Absolutely not! 18If I rebuild what I destroyed, I prove that I am a lawbreaker. 19For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. 20I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!"[d]

 

[reddogs]

He felt Pauls whole thrust was against the Jewish "fence within a fence" of tradition from the elders or mosaic laws, and when he saw Peter doing it he conronted him directly. I dont want to misspeak, but my understanding was he felt Paul had to break this link with tradition which is why he said dont let anyone judge you. But Paul also shows the intent of God had been corrupted with these traditions, and the true essence of the Sabbath/Law was made clear by Christ when He rebuked the Pharisees on their condemnation that the disciples werent following tradition and when He answered the rich young man seeking eternal life. I will see if I can get him to post a explanation on this, or see if he gives me a more complete line of thought on this so I can pass it on in a post.

 

[daro2096]

I been trying to buy this book but nobody has it. It isn't listed on the ABC website and when I was at the Stansborough open day yesterday they had not heard of this book but I know it exists I saw the author showcasing his book on 3ABN Today live last month.

 

[djconklin]

As he notes, the book doesn’t go in-depth on context or the situation that Paul was addressing, especially the nature of the heresies.

I deal with that in footnote 9 at http://www.666man.net/Colossians_2_16-17_By_David_Conklin/colintro.html

 

[djconklin]

I been trying to buy this book but nobody has it. It isn't listed on the ABC website and when I was at the Stansborough open day yesterday they had not heard of this book but I know it exists I saw the author showcasing his book on 3ABN Today live last month.

Try emailing him at faithethics@yahoo.com

 

[djconklin]

One immediate error I saw was saying there were Gnosticism involved. But Gnosticism didn’t exist until the 2nd century.

The full-blown form didn't exist till then--that doesn't mean it sprang up overnite--this is more like a proto-gnosticism.

 

[daro2096]

Try emailing him at faithethics@yahoo.com

Thanks.

 

[djconklin]

You're welcome!

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by oldsage This does sound interesting, I personally hold to the yearly, monthly, weekly view because I think it makes the best sense, but I am always willing to look at the Traditional Adventist view on this topic.

Chris

You are the unnamed Sabbatarian

...

 

[David Conklin]

Book Review!
Putting the Sabbath to Rest: A Scriptural Study of Colossians 2:16 by Ron Du Preez (Member of the Biblical Research Institute).

...

So that you know where I am coming from on the topic, I started reading the book at least tentatively in the camp of the newer alternative view, agreeing with Rodriguez, etc.

...

(I also plan to read again some of DJConklin's views which parallel Du Preez's).

Ron sent me an email in which he noted that Dr. Rodriquez had switched his POV from Dr. Bacchiochi's to ours (Ron and mine). In Dr. Rodriquez's remarks about this subject he paraphrased one of my ideas.

My study can be seen at A Study on Col. 2:16-17