col 2:16 the accurate interpretation and the final word on the text

[Viren]

That is simply not the case , the context of the books of Hebrews is about not loosing faith in Christ when you are on the verge of victory. The author is using an example of a story the JEWS would tell while attending synagogue. These Jewish believer were abandoning Christ and hiding in the synagogue. He is using the story of the Jews unfaithfulness when looking at the overwhelming circumstances and doubhting God and loosing faith. He is saying that they are in the same type of postition. If they give up now they will miss out on the rest to come.

The day to enter that rest is "Today" through belief. It's the rest that God's been enjoying since the creation of the world. Those who rest with God enjoy the true spiritual Sabbath. So I disagree that it's a day to come.

 

[Dave-W]

The day to enter that rest is "Today" through belief. It's the rest that God's been enjoying since the creation of the world. Those who rest with God enjoy the true spiritual Sabbath. So I disagree that it's a day to come.

This is a Hebrew document we are talking about. Whether or not it was first composed in Hebrew or Aramaic, it was written by a Hebrew speaker to Hebrew speakers. All Semitic languages including Hebrew Aramaic and Arabic have multiple levels of meaning, all true simultaneously.

So the text does not to be either this meaning or that meaning - it can be fully both.

 

[Viren]

This is a Hebrew document we are talking about. Whether or not it was first composed in Hebrew or Aramaic, it was written by a Hebrew speaker to Hebrew speakers. All Semitic languages including Hebrew Aramaic and Arabic have multiple levels of meaning, all true simultaneously.

So the text does not to be either this meaning or that meaning - it can be fully both.

I agree that the Sabbath rest will be in the future too. It's past, present and future.

 

[Adventist Dissident]

The day to enter that rest is "Today" through belief. It's the rest that God's been enjoying since the creation of the world. Those who rest with God enjoy the true spiritual Sabbath. So I disagree that it's a day to come.

No that is not the context. "Today" is a refrence to the test of their faith, like the other in the O.T. who failed the test and did not enter the promise land and the rest that was associated with it. , he is urging them to hold fast to Christ to there faith and not to give up because Christ is the mean to enter the rest that is to come, future. We are able to experiance a portion of the rest now, like the COI in the wilderness, they were out of bondage to the Egyptian, but not to the final destination. If they gave up they would not see the final reward.

 

[Adventist Dissident]

This is a Hebrew document we are talking about. Whether or not it was first composed in Hebrew or Aramaic, it was written by a Hebrew speaker to Hebrew speakers. All Semitic languages including Hebrew Aramaic and Arabic have multiple levels of meaning, all true simultaneously.

So the text does not to be either this meaning or that meaning - it can be fully both.

see post #183

 

[Adventist Dissident]

Rest, needs to be Defined here. Rest is not about work or non-work, REST is the ideal life after god has brought order out of chaos and conqured all enemies inside and out. That rest can only be experienced when God is soverign in our lives & in the world. The author of Hebrews picks up on the now and not yet theme in the bible. Believers experience a portion of what God has for us now, but will not experience all of it until "all thing are brought under his feet. To bring something under ones feet is a sign of Submission. This was the problem in Hebrews. They had been promised "rest" the ideal life, but they were not experiencing it all the time, with the rejection of friends the confiscation of property, the violence and abuse, they were giving up. The author says if you have tasted of the heavenly gifts and you go quit there is not help for you. The Author is urging to remain in the rest they have experience and let God prove himself again.

https://biologos.org/resources/videos/john-walton-on-understanding-genesis

 

[Adventist Dissident]

Viren, I want ask that you stick to the topic. Col 2 or Acts 15. If you want to start another thread about Hebrews please feel free to do so. I would ask Tall to move the portions of the tread referring to Hebrews to a new post called "rest in Hebrews....what does it mean." Believe it or not, I have actually heard your arguments before considered them and ultimately rejected them.

 

[tall73]

I would ask Tall to move the portions of the tread referring to Hebrews to a new post called "rest in Hebrews

I have not been a mod for ages, so I have no control over any of the Hebrews discussion. But this is also why I thought it would be better to discuss the sacrifice and feast aspects first, because we all know what happens if the thread turns into a Sabbath thread in the Adventist section.

In the same way you raised the argument about the Lord of the Sabbath, from another text, they are raising the Hebrews argument to bolster their argument. More and more texts will be looked at. To some degree it is hard not to as the overall question is whether the things in the list of Col 2 are still required/sanctioned/recommended, etc. for Gentiles. However, the thread drift might be slowed by sticking to the sacrifice and feast questions first.

 

[Viren]

No that is not the context. "Today" is a refrence to the test of their faith, like the other in the O.T. who failed the test and did not enter the promise land and the rest that was associated with it. , he is urging them to hold fast to Christ to there faith and not to give up because Christ is the mean to enter the rest that is to come, future. We are able to experiance a portion of the rest now, like the COI in the wilderness, they were out of bondage to the Egyptian, but not to the final destination. If they gave up they would not see the final reward.

The scripture is pretty clear.

Hebrews 4:3

"For we which have believed do enter into rest"

Hebrews 4:7-8

"God again set a certain day, calling it “Today.” This he did when a long time later he spoke through David, as in the passage already quoted:

“Today, if you hear his voice,
do not harden your hearts.”

8 For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken later about another day."

The text never mentions a partial rest now and full rest in the future. It just says today if you hear his voice believe and enter into rest.

 

[Adventist Dissident]

The scripture is pretty clear.

Hebrews 4:3

"For we which have believed do enter into rest"

Hebrews 4:7-8

"God again set a certain day, calling it “Today.” This he did when a long time later he spoke through David, as in the passage already quoted:

“Today, if you hear his voice,
do not harden your hearts.”

8 For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken later about another day."

The text never mentions a partial rest now and full rest in the future. It just says today if you hear his voice believe and enter into rest.

I asked you not to post in this on hebrews but to start a different thread. because you did not respect the thread or the request I will resposde to you after this post.
This is not talking about sabbath. Did Joshua give them sabbath rest? NO they already had it. Rest is about entering the promise land. Did he give them the promise land yes but, they had enemies to conquer. 2 Samuel 7:1 "After the king was settled in his palace and the LORD had given him rest from all his enemies around him," Notice rest in this text has nothing to do with Sabbath. So to the rest that comes by faith does not undo the rest that is given on the Sabbath. They are 2 different application of the same concept. Sorry.

 

[Adventist Dissident]

I have not been a mod for ages, so I have no control over any of the Hebrews discussion. But this is also why I thought it would be better to discuss the sacrifice and feast aspects first, because we all know what happens if the thread turns into a Sabbath thread in the Adventist section.

In the same way you raised the argument about the Lord of the Sabbath, from another text, they are raising the Hebrews argument to bolster their argument. More and more texts will be looked at. To some degree it is hard not to as the overall question is whether the things in the list of Col 2 are still required/sanctioned/recommended, etc. for Gentiles. However, the thread drift might be slowed by sticking to the sacrifice and feast questions first.

tall I am not the one who deviated from the OP.

 

[Viren]

I asked you not to post in this on hebrews but to start a different thread. because you did not respect the thread or the request I will resposde to you after this post.
This is not talking about sabbath. Did Joshua give them sabbath rest? NO they already had it. Rest is about entering the promise land. Did he give them the promise land yes but, they had enemies to conquer. 2 Samuel 7:1 "After the king was settled in his palace and the LORD had given him rest from all his enemies around him," Notice rest in this text has nothing to do with Sabbath. So to the rest that comes by faith does not undo the rest that is given on the Sabbath. They are 2 different application of the same concept. Sorry.

Sorry, I didn't see post #187. I will respect your request.

 

[tall73]

Back to Col 2:16

It seems so far that you think the passage would essentially have the following meaning:

Col 2:16 Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath, because you are qualified to do these things.


If that is the case though, how does that make sense with food and drink being offerings?

 

[BobRyan]

Neither food nor drink nor Sabbath is being banned in Col 2.

Rather what is being banned is 'making stuff up'

"16 Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day— 17 things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ. 18 Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of the angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen, inflated without cause by his fleshly mind, 19 and not holding fast to the head, from whom the entire body, being supplied and held together by the joints and ligaments, grows with a growth which is from God.

20 If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world, why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees, such as, 21 “Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!” 22 (which all refer to things destined to perish with use)—in accordance with the commandments and teachings of men? 23 These are matters which have, to be sure, the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-abasement and severe treatment of the body, but are of no value against fleshly indulgence."

This is not Paul - condemning the Bible - rather it is Paul condemning the man-made-religion that "makes stuff up"

 

[Dave-W]

This is not Paul - condemning the Bible - rather it is Paul condemning the man-made-religion that "makes stuff up"

Amen

 

[Dave-W]

double post ....

 

[Adventist Dissident]

Sorry, I didn't see post #187. I will respect your request.

thank-you, if you would like to speak about the other topic, start a thread and I will post.

 

[Adventist Dissident]

Neither food nor drink nor Sabbath is being banned in Col 2.

Rather what is being banned is 'making stuff up'

"16 Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day— 17 things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ. 18 Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of the angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen, inflated without cause by his fleshly mind, 19 and not holding fast to the head, from whom the entire body, being supplied and held together by the joints and ligaments, grows with a growth which is from God.

20 If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world, why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees, such as, 21 “Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!” 22 (which all refer to things destined to perish with use)—in accordance with the commandments and teachings of men? 23 These are matters which have, to be sure, the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-abasement and severe treatment of the body, but are of no value against fleshly indulgence."

This is not Paul - condemning the Bible - rather it is Paul condemning the man-made-religion that "makes stuff up"

I will disagree here with you bob, that section refres to the gonstics that are knowlidge & wisdom and retorich for Christ. Maybe you did not catch it in the reading or in the OP. but paul reach 2 conclusion " let know judge...." "Let no one defraud." the statment about judgment is refereing to people being forbidden to participate, you are quallifed and not good enough and you not doing it the right way. the statement of defrauading is about replacing the greek/human ideas for Christ. Those are man made. The Festivals do not fall under this they are God made.

 

[Adventist Dissident]

Back to Col 2:16

It seems so far that you think the passage would essentially have the following meaning:

Col 2:16 Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath, because you are qualified to do these things.


If that is the case though, how does that make sense with food and drink being offerings?

still working on that part. let me give you someting of the top of my head. food and drink in Jewish had very specific meanings, the were concerned about purity and holiness. I think he might be saying that the strictness of the Jews might be ease up a bit or changed some what. They may not have been "required", forced to do those. The Jews had a tendecy to make that the whole ball of wax. Paul may be saying that is a secondary issue. Don't let them set the priorty.

Now concering food and drink and the greeks, they would have condemed them for indulging the flesh at a festival, because the body was bad and the spirit was good, So a festival where they celebrated might have been viewd by gnostic as non spiritual even second class.

 

[BobRyan]

I will disagree here with you bob, that section refres to the gonstics that are knowlidge & wisdom and retorich for Christ. Maybe you did not catch it in the reading or in the OP. but paul reach 2 conclusion " let know judge...." "Let no one defraud." the statment about judgment is refereing to people being forbidden to participate, you are quallifed and not good enough and you not doing it the right way. the statement of defrauading is about replacing the greek/human ideas for Christ. Those are man made. The Festivals do not fall under this they are God made.

Which is my statement about Col 2 being directed at the problem of "making stuff up"