What Are The Sabbaths In Colossians 2:16, 17 Shadows Of?

Martinman said:

Victor C,


One of the most important principles in determining what is truth, is making one's conclusion on the weight. By this I mean that one must gather all the texts relating to a given topic, and place all those that seem to agree on one side, and all those that apparently seem contradictory, on the other side, to determine where the weight of the evidence is. Then one needs to take those few texts that apparently contradict the majority of the evidence and, through the help of the Holy Spirit, examine them thoroughly to determine just what they really are saying, so that they harmonize perfectly with the majority of the texts.


When we do this in our study, we will see a true harmony and a wondrous beauty in the pure truth of which we have never dreamed. Our spiritual eyes will be opened and our understanding quickened, so that all inspired evidence will have no contradictions and perfectly harmonized.


I have a few questions I would like to ask you, but first please read these statements very carefully as they say it much better than I can. Please notice how similar our attitude is to the attitude of the first disciples of the Messiah.






He (Christ) took the old truths, of which He Himself was the originator, and placed them before His hearers in heaven’s own light. How different was their representation. What a flood of meaning and brightness and spirituality was brought in by their explanation.” CTr 299.2

“After His resurrection Christ opened the understanding of His followers, that they might understand the Scriptures. Everything had been transformed by the working of the arts of Satan. Truth was covered up by the rubbish of error, and hidden from finite sight. When Christ referred to His humiliation, rejection, and crucifixion, the disciples could not take in His meaning. It had been a part of their education to expect Christ to set up a temporal kingdom, and when He spoke of His sufferings they could not understand His words. . . .” CTr 299.3


“Christ had many truths to give to His disciples of which He could not speak, because they did not advance with the light that was flashed upon the Levitical laws and the sacrificial offerings. They did not embrace the light, advance with the light, and follow on to still greater brightness as Providence should lead the way.” CTr 299.4


“And for the same reason Christ’s disciples today do not comprehend important matters of truth. So dull has been the comprehension of even those who teach the truth to others that many things cannot be opened to them until they reach heaven. It ought not to be so. But as minds become narrow, they think they know it all, and set one stake after another in points of truths of which they have only a glimpse. People close their minds as though there were no more for them to learn, and should the Lord attempt to lead them on they would not take up with the increased light. They cling to the spot where they think they see a glimmer of light, when it is only a link in the living chain of truths and promises to be studied. . . .” CTr 299.5


“The development of truth will be the reward to the humble-hearted seeker who will fear God and walk with Him. The truth that the mind grasps as truth is capable of constant expansion and new development. . .. Manuscript 143, 1897, Manuscript Releases, Vol 16, pp. 122, 123.

Click to expand...

Martinman,

The overall scope of the historical record presented in Scripture is exactly what has been dropped into your lap. Scripture doesn't contradict itself, and the model you show such a devotion to can't be reconciled with the historical record. Your means to hang onto the busted model is by ignoring Scripture.

I am not impressed by such misplaced devotion.
Nor am I impressed by a misplaced devotion in an acknowledged false prophet that those within progressive Adventism as well as orthodox Christianity have relegated to the trash heap.

Welcome to life outside Hiram's cornfield.

Martinman said:

Anyway, VictorC, I wanted to ask you, How do you see the inspired evidence of when the new covenant really began?

Click to expand...

Hebrews 9
15 And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.
16 For where there is a testament, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. 17 For a testament is in force after men are dead, since it has no power at all while the testator lives.

Martinman said:

Do you see the new covenant as really the oldest covenant of all?

Click to expand...

No.
You negate the need for a new covenant by stating it existed before the death of the Testator.

Hebrews 8:13
In that He says, “A new covenant, ” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

Martinman said:

"Believe in the LORD your God, so shall ye be established; believe his prophets, so shall ye prosper." 2 Chronicles 20:20.

Click to expand...

You would help your credibility here if you were to quote God's prophets, rather than Ellen White.

Isaiah 28
16 Therefore thus says the Lord GOD:

“ Behold, I lay in Zion a stone for a foundation,
A tried stone, a precious cornerstone, a sure foundation;
Whoever believes will not act hastily.
17 Also I will make justice the measuring line,
And righteousness the plummet;
The hail will sweep away the refuge of lies,
And the waters will overflow the hiding place.
18 Your covenant with death will be annulled,
And your agreement with Sheol will not stand;
When the overflowing scourge passes through,
Then you will be trampled down by it.

Hebrews 7
18 For on the one hand there is an annulling of the former commandment because of its weakness and unprofitableness, 19 for the law made nothing perfect; on the other hand, there is thebringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God.

Now let me ask you a question: Have you ever considered that the concept of an "old-covenant Christian" is an oxymoron?
Or another question: Have you ever noticed that Abraham received the promise that forms the basis of our salvation 430 years before the first sabbath existed?

1 Chronicles 16:17
And confirmed it to Jacob for a statute,To Israel for an everlasting covenant,

Psalm 105:10
And confirmed it to Jacob for a statute,To Israel as an everlasting covenant,

Galatians 3:15
[ The Changeless Promise ] Brethren, I speak in the manner of men: Though it is only a man’s covenant, yet if it is confirmed, no one annuls or adds to it.

Galatians 3:17
And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should make the promise of no effect.

What does it mean that the "covenant was confirmed before of God in Christ?"

Annul would be taking away of the words of the covenant. The law did not annul, but it added to the words of the covenant spoken by God to Abraham and confirmed with an oath.

Heb 6:17-18
17 Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath:

18 That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us: KJV

Revelation 22 witnesses that those who take away from the words of the prophecy/covenant that their part to the city/tree of life will be taken away(and Jesus said it would be given to another). And that those who add to the words of the prophesy/covenant that they will suffer the plagues.

They Egyptian people suffered the 10 plagues, but they were blessed through this process and given to know that the Lord (now Jesus our Lord) is God of the earth. The Egyptian people and the counselors of Pharaoh had urged him to let the people go. Pharaoh had challenged the authority of the Lord that he should obey him. The Egyptians at this time did not know the Lord as God.

The Lord, our God, spoke the law at Sinai, through his angel, with the attending sound of the trumpet. The earth shook at his presence and Moses trembled and the people felt like they were dying. When the Lord speaks to us from heaven, out of the new Jerusalem sanctuary and throne of God, the Father, then we will tremble at his word or be like Pharaoh, the 12 tribes and Joab and Ahab and King Zedekiah and Judas and our hearts be hardened and draw back unto perdition.

Pharaoh, the 12 tribes and Joab and Ahab and King Zedekiah and Judas drew back from the word of the Lord and sought to secure their temporal possessions and authority and all of these died in frustration. Ananias and Sapphira also partook of the spirit of drawing back to secure their temporal desires. They all "went back into their house to get their possessions" and "having escaped from a lion and a bear they put their arm on their wall and an adder bit them."

Remember Lot's wife. Sabbath is rest from our possessions when God calls to us to leave them behind and to not even look back at them.

Joe

visionary said:

1 Chronicles 16:17
And confirmed it to Jacob for a statute,To Israel for an everlasting covenant,

Psalm 105:10
And confirmed it to Jacob for a statute,To Israel as an everlasting covenant,

Click to expand...

Circumcision was also called an everlasting covenant in Genesis 17:13, but it came to an end when superceded by Leviticus 12:1-3. Jesus acknowledged this change of origin in John 7:22. This is how a later covenant replaces the jurisdiction of the previous covenant, and the law itself confirms that legal precedent. This is especially true when the new covenant is incompatible with the covenant it replaced, mandating the end of the previous one's tenure: "He takes away the first that He may establish the second" (Hebrews 10:9).

visionary said:

Galatians 3:15
[ The Changeless Promise ] Brethren, I speak in the manner of men: Though it is only a man’s covenant, yet if it is confirmed, no one annuls or adds to it.

Galatians 3:17
And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should make the promise of no effect.

Click to expand...

The "changeless promise" refers to God's promise to Abraham 430 years before the law existed. That was not annulled. Galatians 3 and 4 explain how we were redeemed from the law, an event before which the Gentiles could not join into the promise to Abraham: "In your Seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed", an expression in the plural outside the singular recipient of the Sinai covenant.

Joe67 said:

What does it mean that the "covenant was confirmed before of God in Christ?"

Annul would be taking away of the words of the covenant.

Click to expand...

Which covenant are you addressing here, Joe?

Joe67 said:

The law did not annul, but it added to the words of the covenant spoken by God to Abraham and confirmed with an oath.

Click to expand...

This conclusion is a speculation that is opposed to the message contained in Galatians 3.

Joe67 said:

Sabbath is rest from our possessions when God calls to us to leave them behind and to not even look back at them.

Click to expand...

Much of your post assembled disparate verses (here a little, there a little - an error exposed in Isaiah 28:13), and you present a component of the Sinai covenant in the present tense, as if God hasn't actually given us His permanent rest that replaced the sabbath. Moreover, you have taken the liberty to redefine the law in a manner nowhere contained in it.

VictorC said:

Circumcision was also called an everlasting covenant in Genesis 17:13, but it came to an end when superceded by Leviticus 12:1-3. Jesus acknowledged this change of origin in John 7:22. This is how a later covenant replaces the jurisdiction of the previous covenant, and the law itself confirms that legal precedent. This is especially true when the new covenant is incompatible with the covenant it replaced, mandating the end of the previous one's tenure: "He takes away the first that He may establish the second" (Hebrews 10:9).

The "changeless promise" refers to God's promise to Abraham 430 years before the law existed. That was not annulled. Galatians 3 and 4 explain how we were redeemed from the law, an event before which the Gentiles could not join into the promise to Abraham: "In your Seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed", an expression in the plural outside the singular recipient of the Sinai covenant.

Click to expand...

The biggest changes was in the people saying "I will do all that you say" to the Lord [self justification by works] to the Lord saying "I will put it into your heart" in the new covenant [I will by faith and promise]

visionary said:

The biggest changes was in the people saying "I will do all that you say" to the Lord [self justification by works] to the Lord saying "I will put it into your heart" in the new covenant [I will by faith and promise]

Click to expand...

This is a red herring employed as a switch-and-bait tactic.

Besides, you already know that Jeremiah 31:32 and Hebrews 8:9 specify a new covenant that isn't according to Sinai, while your allusion is to continuing the obsolete covenant from Sinai and just move it to another location in complete deference to Scripture.

First covenant is when the people vowed.. and God promised.. Second covenant is when God vowed, ratified it in blood, where it can not be annulled or changed.. that He will put it into our hearts.. But that which was written in stone is now to be written in our hearts... via Holy Spirit..

visionary said:

First covenant is when the people vowed.. and God promised.. Second covenant is when God vowed, ratified it in blood, where it can not be annulled or changed.. that He will put it into our hearts.. But that which was written in stone is now to be written in our hearts... via Holy Spirit..

Click to expand...

I don't see any interest in discussion here. I see only conclusions opined that contradict the Bible. I came to a discussion forum for the learning experience that can be found here, and I have no interest in others who don't share that goal.

Its weird to me this whole spirit of the law written in our hearts thing. I was SDA for 28 years and never heard this, yet all the current SDAs seem to have the mantra down. I feel like I missed something.

VictorC said:

I don't see any interest in discussion here. I see only conclusions opined that contradict the Bible. I came to a discussion forum for the learning experience that can be found here, and I have no interest in others who don't share that goal.

Click to expand...

You see conclusions that you consider in contradiction to your interpretation of the Bible... big difference.

If you had studied the covenants.. you would have noticed some interesting nuances that shed light on the subject. But you have taken the position that the covenant has made a clean swipe at all that the Lord has worked so hard to establish as His, with a sample of people to start, who jumped at the chance to say "all you say we will do" but then could not. SO our Lord has picked up on the fault was not with the covenant but with them.. and said "I will place it not on stone but in their hearts" .

A learning experience comes from delving into that which you have not yet studied or understood. Lord will not let a drop of His inspiring Word come back to Him void. All of scripture is inspired. His Holy Spirit will teach those who will hear.

visionary said:

You see conclusions that you consider in contradiction to your interpretation of the Bible... big difference.

Click to expand...

The problem arises when Scripture is subjected to interpretation, rather than allowing it to speak for itself.

visionary said:

If you had studied the covenants..

Click to expand...

I have.

visionary said:

you would have noticed some interesting nuances that shed light on the subject. But you have taken the position that the covenant has made a clean swipe at all that the Lord has worked so hard to establish as His, with a sample of people to start, who jumped at the chance to say "all you say we will do" but then could not.

Click to expand...

This dismisses what the Lord purchased at a great cost to Himself, when He chose to redeem us from the former covenant that was violated.

visionary said:

SO our Lord has picked up on the fault was not with the covenant but with them..

Click to expand...

Hebrews 8:7 places the fault on the former covenant itself: "For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second". The narrative goes on to explain in the following verses that it was violated by the recipients - and refers to Jeremiah's prophecy that promises a new covenant unlike the former.

visionary said:

and said "I will place it not on stone but in their hearts" .

Click to expand...

No, that's an opinion that doesn't appear in the text.

God stated that He would write His "My law" that isn't according to Sinai on the hearts and minds of Judah and Israel, and shows a result of a personal knowledge of God -the Creator, not the created- once that happended. Romans 2:14-15 indicates that the Gentiles already had the principles of the former law in their hearts, meaning that moving the first covenant's location wasn't a new covenant promise. It is also impossible to call the Sinai covenant obsolete in Hebrews 8:13 and concurrently claim that the obsolete is the new covenant.

visionary said:

A learning experience comes from delving into that which you have not yet studied or understood. Lord will not let a drop of His inspiring Word come back to Him void. All of scripture is inspired. His Holy Spirit will teach those who will hear.

Click to expand...

I agree completely, and add that it is necessary to allow Scripture to speak for itself without forcing a preclusion onto its message.

Kira Light said:

Its weird to me this whole spirit of the law written in our hearts thing. I was SDA for 28 years and never heard this, yet all the current SDAs seem to have the mantra down. I feel like I missed something.

Click to expand...

Search the White Estate for the phrase "law of love", and you will find it central to Adventist theology. Ellen White claimed the Sinai covenant originated in Eden, and its final disposition was to transfer it their hearts and minds.

visionary said:

IF you believe that a day in the Lord's court is like a thousand years here on earth... yeah.. one of these days.. we will enter into the Lord's rest in Heaven and join Him in the {earth's millinium rest} Heaven's Great Sabbath with our Lord.

Click to expand...

If as you suggest the seventh-day sabbath is one of the sabbaths that is a shadow of things to come, then do you also conclude that the seventh-day sabbath is one of the sabbaths described in Colossian 2? If not, why not?

BFA

Martinman said:

It is an absolute impossibility that the 7th-day Sabbath could be a "shadow". As I've said before, the 7th-day Sabbath was instituted for us when the work of creation of this world was completed.

Click to expand...

I am quite sure that we have driven this subject into the ground, so I will hop off the merry-go-round here.

Our friend Lao has suggested that the sabbath is not only a memorial of a past event but also a celebration of a future event. Do you agree or disagree with Lao?

Then, using the interpretation that the Messiah gave to all of the "shadow Sabbaths", including the "shadow Sabbath" of the Jubile year, the day that He began His 3 and 1/2 year public ministry, He fulfilled the "shadow Sabbath" on the 10th day of the 7th month, by fulfilling it on the 7th-day Sabbath, showing very, very clearly that the "shadow Sabbaths" were caused by the 7th-day Sabbath, and were prophecies of the 7th-day Sabbath, if you will. See Luke 4:16-21. 3 and 1/2 years later, at the time of the fulfillment of the 52 days of the spring festivals, the exact same interpretation is seen in the Messiah's fulfillment of the 8 "shadow Sabbaths" dispersed among these 52 days, when all 8 of them occurred on 7th-day Sabbaths, thus interpreting these "shadow Sabbaths", for what they really were, PROPHECIES OF 7TH DAY SABBATHS.

Click to expand...

So, in your estimation, a number of holy convocations served solely to foreshadow another holy convocation???

How can this be when all of the holy convocations were contemporaneous?

Something seems to be missing here.

BFA

Byfaithalone1 said:

If as you suggest the seventh-day sabbath is one of the sabbaths that is a shadow of things to come, then do you also conclude that the seventh-day sabbath is one of the sabbaths described in Colossian 2? If not, why not?

BFA

Click to expand...

But of course it is... If you read Col 2:17 it is talking about not giving into the rituals of each those things mentioned, but doing what the Lord is leading you to do while observing them. In other words, do as Yeshua did on obedience to the Law, not frought with traditions that supersede the very purpose God had intended, but with the Holy Spirit guidance to love your neighbour and God above all else. It was the fight that Yeshua did while He was alive to defend His Law against the traditions that were burdening it so bad that not even the Pharisee could keep them all. Paul continued with Yeshua's message.

Martinman said:

It is an absolute impossibility that the 7th-day Sabbath could be a "shadow".

As I've said before, the 7th-day Sabbath was instituted for us when the work of creation of this world was completed.

Genesis 2:1-3-"Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
2:2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
2:3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created ..."

Click to expand...

Your assertion of impossibility that the sabbath was a shadow in deference to Colossians 2:16-17 begins with ascribing an origin of the sabbath unsupported by Scripture. Look at your own quote - the seventh day of creation was God's "My rest". Hebrews 4:4 quotes directly from Genesis 2:2, and Hebrews 4:1 shows this as promised rest yet to be attained by the children of Israel in the old covenant: "since a promise remains of entering His rest, let us fear lest any of you seem to have come short of it".

These people had been keeping the sabbath for 1500 years.
They did not attain God's "My rest" during that time.
Jesus clearly stated "The Sabbath was made for man" in Mark 2:27, distinguishing it apart from God's "My rest".

So, you ascribe to an error that misplaces the sabbath's origin, and from that error speculate on ever growing error. Magnified error may sound pious, but it is still error. This has been shown to you before. Doing this once only demonstrates a lack of understanding. Repeating the error after it has been shown to you suggests incompetence or deceit.