Colossians 2:16-17; Romans 14:5-8; Acts 15 -> License not to keep the Sabbath?

[TruthSeek3r]

Is Paul giving Christians license to omit Sabbath observance in Colossians 2:16-17 and Romans 14:5-8? Is this corroborated by Acts 15?

Below the passages:

Colossians 2:16-17

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. 17 These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.

Romans 14:5-8

5 One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7 For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. 8 For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's.

Acts 15:5-11

5 Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses.” 6 The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 7 After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: “Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8 God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9 He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10 Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear? 11 No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”

Acts 15:23-29

23 with the following letter: “The brothers, both the apostles and the elders, to the brothers who are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia, greetings. 24 Since we have heard that some persons have gone out from us and troubled you[d] with words, unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions, 25 it has seemed good to us, having come to one accord, to choose men and send them to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will tell you the same things by word of mouth. 28 For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: 29 that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.”

Taken together, can we unambiguously conclude from these passages that Christians are free from the mandate to observe the Sabbath, and therefore that they can either keep it or not without feeling any remorse either way? Or is there still room for interpretation that may lead to the opposite conclusion?

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Is Paul giving Christians license to omit Sabbath observance in Colossians 2:16-17 and Romans 14:5-8? Is this also corroborated by Acts 15:23-29?

These are the passages:

Colossians 2:16-17
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. 17 These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.

Romans 14:5-8
5 One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7 For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. 8 For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's.

Acts 15:23-29
23 with the following letter: “The brothers, both the apostles and the elders, to the brothers[c] who are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia, greetings. 24 Since we have heard that some persons have gone out from us and troubled you[d] with words, unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions, 25 it has seemed good to us, having come to one accord, to choose men and send them to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will tell you the same things by word of mouth. 28 For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: 29 that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.”

Taken together, is a correct conclusion from these passages that Christians are not required to keep the Sabbath?

Have you ever looked at this site?
What day is the Sabbath and does it matter? | Sabbath Truth It has a lot of the answers with the Biblical scriptures on a lot of your questions.

It has one of the best explanations on Colossians 2:16-17

Let’s first take a look at the apostle Paul's words in Colossians 2:14–17: “Having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. … So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ.”

When some read about the sabbath days that were shadows and that passed away at the cross, they think that Paul was referring to the weekly Sabbath, the fourth of the Ten Commandments. Is this accurate? It’s important to get this right, because our interpretation of the apostle’s actual meaning can lead us into deeper truth or into deeper error.


Two Sabbaths


First, there is nothing in the Ten Commandment law about food, drink, festivals, new moons, or sabbath days (plural). All these were actually separate laws that God gave for the physical and spiritual health of His Old Testament people; these were called ceremonial laws.


Second, Paul wrote plainly that he was speaking of “sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come,” and not of the weekly Sabbath, which is a memorial of something that happened in the past, at the creation. The contrast between a shadow and a memorial is quite clear. Indeed, the fourth commandment does not tell us to keep the seventh day as a type of something to come. It says: “Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. ... For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it” (Exodus 20:8, 11).

Moreover, to show that he had something other than the weekly Sabbath in mind, Paul distinctly mentioned “sabbaths,” plural,” which are a shadow of things to come.” (The word “sabbath” in the Greek can be singular or plural according to Strong’s and Greek lexicons.)


Festivals and Shadows


The King James uses the word “holyday,” and some will contend that it refers to the weekly Sabbath, while the expression “sabbath days” refers to yearly sabbaths. The American Standard Version uses “feast day” instead of “holyday,” and this likely a clearer translation. The word translated “holyday” is from the Greek heorte, and in John 5:1, this same word is used to designate one of the yearly festivals of the Jews: “After this there was a feast [heorte] of the Jews; and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.” This is one of the holy days that Paul spoke of as having been nailed to the cross.


The “shadows” Paul mentions pointed to Jesus as a Savior from sin and were observed with that in mind. But the weekly Sabbath was made for man before sin entered into the world, before man would need atonement. The shadows pointing forward to His death as an atonement for sin certainly were not instituted until after sin. Therefore, since the weekly Sabbath was instituted before sin, just as was the marriage institution, it was not a shadow of Christ’s death as a Savior from sin; and His death did not end the Sabbath day any more than it brought marriage to an end. Both the Sabbath and marriage came to us in a perfect world.

Paul’s language shows he was referencing the shadowy ceremonies that pointed forward to and ended at the cross. Notice again, carefully, his words in Colossians 2:14: “Having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.” Paul mentions that these laws were “against us” and “contrary” to us. Would it be contrary to Christians to refrain from idolatry, using God’s name in vain, dishonoring parents, murder, theft, adultery, lying, and coveting—the sins rebuked by the Ten Commandments? Thus, the apostle must have been talking of another law—a law that enjoined food offerings, drink offerings, the observance of festivals, new moons, and yearly sabbaths.


Why Are These Laws Contrary to Us?


Why would the observance of these ceremonies after the death of Christ be contrary to the Christian faith? The yearly sabbath of the Passover involved killing a lamb that represented Jesus, the Lamb of God. The apostle Paul taught directly, “Indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us" (1 Corinthians 5:7). Thus, to keep offering a sacrificial lamb after His death would be to imply that Jesus had not accomplished atonement. Such an observance would be contrary to the teachings of Christianity.


Many other shadowy requirements of the ceremonial law pointed to the death of Jesus on the cross, as well. All these festivals, food and drink offerings, and sabbaths that were nailed to the cross, Paul declared to be “a shadow of things to come.” Then he adds, "But the substance is of Christ." That is, the substance that cast these shadows was Christ’s body on the cross.

Think of it this way—late in the afternoon when a tall tree casts its shadow eastward, one can begin at the farthest end of the shadow and follow it until he or she gets to the tree that casts the shadow, and there the shadow ceases to be. Likewise, we can go back to the time when “through one man [Adam] sin entered the world, and death through sin,” and there a merciful God promised to send a Redeemer (Genesis 3:15), a Substitute, to die in man’s place. To keep man continually reminded of this fact, and to supply him with a means of expressing his faith in the coming sacrifice, God instituted these ceremonies. All of these were included in the law that was not written on tables of stone.

Follow these shadowy ceremonies all the way from Eden to the time of Moses, and then through the wilderness journey and on for hundreds of years after the settlement in Canaan, and at last to Calvary—and there they cease. So it would be "against us" and "contrary" to our faith to observe these ceremonies after Jesus' death. Not so with the other law. It is just as necessary to refrain from idolatry, using God’s name in vain, dishonoring the Sabbath, murder, adultery, and theft after the cross as before. Indeed, it was the violation of these principles that caused the death of Christ. Could they have been set aside or changed to accommodate the carnal mind, Jesus need not have died.

Now with these truths before us, let us again read Colossians 2:14–17 and see how plainly Paul revealed that he did not mean that the weekly seventh-day Sabbath had been nailed to the cross: "Having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. … So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ."

 

[Bob S]

"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."

Why would Paul write about the festivals that were all Sabbaths, new moon that was as Sabbath and then add the only other Sabbaths of the Torah and not mean the weekly Sabbath. There were no other Sabbaths in Torah. All of the Sabbaths of the Sinai covenant were ritual laws and to bring up that the weekly Sabbath was part of the ten commandments is a non non sequitur.

 

[TruthSeek3r]

First, there is nothing in the Ten Commandment law about food, drink, festivals, new moons, or sabbath days (plural). All these were actually separate laws that God gave for the physical and spiritual health of His Old Testament people; these were called ceremonial laws.

Can you provide a reputable source (e.g. a Jewish expert in the Torah) backing up the claim that they were called ceremonial laws and had a different status than the 10 commandments? Otherwise all of this sounds like mere convenient speculation.

Second, Paul wrote plainly that he was speaking of “sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come,” and not of the weekly Sabbath, which is a memorial of something that happened in the past, at the creation[...]
[...] Moreover, to show that he had something other than the weekly Sabbath in mind, Paul distinctly mentioned “sabbaths,” plural,” which are a shadow of things to come.” (The word “sabbath” in the Greek can be singular or plural according to Strong’s and Greek lexicons.)

The jump from "Paul is using plural" to "Paul is talking about all sabbaths, except the weekly sabbaths" sounds rather handwavy and not very convincing. If Paul really wanted to address all sabbaths with the exception of the weekly ones, he would have said so, but he didn't.

Paul’s language shows he was referencing the shadowy ceremonies that pointed forward to and ended at the cross. Notice again, carefully, his words in Colossians 2:14: “Having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.” Paul mentions that these laws were “against us” and “contrary” to us. Would it be contrary to Christians to refrain from idolatry, using God’s name in vain, dishonoring parents, murder, theft, adultery, lying, and coveting—the sins rebuked by the Ten Commandments? Thus, the apostle must have been talking of another law—a law that enjoined food offerings, drink offerings, the observance of festivals, new moons, and yearly sabbaths.

Here is the biggest red flag of misinterpretation in my opinion. Paul himself explains why the Law can be contrary to us in Romans 7, where he explains that the Law, though holy, no one is capable of perfectly obeying it, thus leading everyone to condemnation by sinning under the Law. See also the accepted answer in this question about 2 Corinthians 3:6 for a complementary discussion.

--------------------------

Lastly, everything you shared was only addressing Colossians 2:16-17. What about Romans 14:5-8 and Acts 15:23-29?

 

[dqhall]

Can you provide a reputable source (e.g. a Jewish expert in the Torah) backing up the claim that they were called ceremonial laws and had a different status than the 10 commandments? Otherwise all of this sounds like mere convenient speculation.


The jump from "Paul is using plural" to "Paul is talking about all sabbaths, except the weekly sabbaths" sounds rather handwavy and not very convincing. If Paul really wanted to address all sabbaths with the exception of the weekly ones, he would have said so, but he didn't.


Here is the biggest red flag of misinterpretation in my opinion. Paul himself explains why the Law can be contrary to us in Romans 7, where he explains that the Law, though holy, no one is capable of perfectly obeying it, thus leading everyone to condemnation by sinning under the Law. See also the accepted answer in this question about 2 Corinthians 3:6 for a complementary discussion.

--------------------------

Lastly, everything you shared was only addressing Colossians 2:16-17. What about Romans 14:5-8 and Acts 15:23-29?

The Torah is considered to be the same law as the ten commandments by Orthodox Jews. These laws about festivals are in the first five books of the Bible, a.k.a Torah or Pentateuch.

They are not allowed to work on the Passover festival day. As has been previously stated in Acts 15, Gentiles are not bound to these laws of festivals, offerings ritual purity, etc. The apostles wanted the Gentiles to abstain from fornication, eating meat sacrificed to idols, eating blood and eating the meat of strangled animals.

The Romans had a legal system in place. The Gentiles could not avoid Roman laws. Some of the laws dated back to the 5th century BC: http://www.historyguide.org/ancient/12tables.html

 

[eleos1954]

Is Paul giving Christians license to omit Sabbath observance in Colossians 2:16-17 and Romans 14:5-8? Is this also corroborated by Acts 15:23-29?

These are the passages:

2:16-17
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. 17 These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.

the above is referencing practices within the ceremonial law

14:5-8
5 One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7 For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. 8 For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's.

the above is in regard to fasting or not fasting ... cerimonial law

15:23-29
23 with the following letter: “The brothers, both the apostles and the elders, to the brothers[c] who are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia, greetings. 24 Since we have heard that some persons have gone out from us and troubled you[d] with words, unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions, 25 it has seemed good to us, having come to one accord, to choose men and send them to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will tell you the same things by word of mouth. 28 For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: 29 that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.”

The above passage ... there were some who were reverting back into paganism practices (verse 29) and Paul was reminding them not to do this ... ie revert back to pagan ways.

together, is a correct conclusion from these passages that Christians are not required to keep the Sabbath?

no not a correct conclusion .... there were many different sabbaths and feasts connected with the earthly sanctuary system (still observed by Orthodox Jews today) ... the 7th day Sabbath is the special day the Lord created for mankind and is in the moral law (the 10).

There is the moral law (the 10 written on stone by God Himself) and there are the ceremonial laws hand written by Moses in a book on paper. The 10 written on tablets of stone was placed in the ark under the mercy seat (symbolic of His throne) they are eternal/ever lasting and unchangeable. ie per Jesus ... not one jot or tittle of the law will be changed.

The ceremonial laws hand written by Moses in a book placed beside the ark .... written on parchment (not placed in the ark). The ceremonial law is what was nailed to the cross, subject to change. (done away with at the cross)

Such is an example of which you quoted ... citing "a" sabbath not "THE" Sabbath of thy Lord thy God (which is THE 7th day)

Exodus 20:10

King James Bible
But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:

Colossians 2:16-17
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. 17 These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.

ie ... many sabbaths were observed in regard to food drink, festivals new moons ... being cerimonial laws

Is it now ok for us to break all of the 10 commandments? Can we pick and choose out of the 10 which ones we will keep ... which ones we will not keep? Does that even make sense?

Were the 10 commandments for the Jews only? No, The Lords 7th day Sabbath was created before there were any Jews.

Were the 10 commandments done away with? No ... if they were we would not know what sin is.

 

[TruthSeek3r]

@eleos1954 take a look a this site, it raises interesting points: The sabbath law was 100% ceremonial and not moral law

Edit: also check out this site: Oxford Bible Church - Chapter 6. The Sabbath: Moral or Ceremonial Law?

 

[eleos1954]

@eleos1954 take a look a this site, it raises interesting points: The sabbath law was 100% ceremonial and not moral law

Edit: also check out this site: Oxford Bible Church - Chapter 6. The Sabbath: Moral or Ceremonial Law?

From the site you referenced:

A. The Sabbath is not a moral law because:

1. The Sabbath is not a moral law because the priests were allowed to profane it: Matt 12:5; Num 28:9-10; Josh 6:15; 1 Ki 20:29; Jn 5:10

The priests were allowed to profane it .... because they were required to perform their priestly work/duties on the Sabbath.

1. The Sabbath is not a moral law because a man could break it without sin to save an animal from a pit.

Jesus said is was lawful and to do good on the Sabbath .... rescuing an animal from a pit was doing good.

Matthew 12:12

11He replied, “If one of you has a sheep and it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will he not take hold of it and lift it out? 12 How much more valuable is a man than a sheep! Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.

1. The Sabbath is not a moral law because Jesus broke the Sabbath without sin in John 5:18.

Jesus healed a man on the Sabbath (again, healing is doing good and lawful). The clergy of the time were in error of their understanding of the Sabbath and Jesus was making it known to them that they were in error with their thinking regarding the Sabbath.

1. The Sabbath is not a moral law because God never intended for all mankind to keep it: God NEVER charged the Gentiles with breaking it, much less even keeping it. Only the Jews were expected to keep it. Interesting that God charges the Gentiles many times for breaking all the 9 moral commandments on the tablets of stone, but NEVER ONCE says anything about breaking the Sabbath!

The Jews treated gentiles as strangers and aliens and this was not the original intent of what the Lord wanted them to do .... they were to include all people ... they were in error in the way they were doing things ... time after time Jesus corrected them .... yet they did not listen .... did not change the error of their ways. Time after time prophets were sent to them and they killed them rather than listening to them.

Matthew 23

13 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let in those who wish to enter.

The Gospel was to be taken to the Jews first then then the gentiles. The Lord giving the Jews of that time .... their last opportunity to change their ways .... they did not .... in fact plotted to kill him ... and therefore the Lord left their house (the temple desolate) even after that the Jews continued in their rebellion ... and then later on Gospel then went to the gentiles and through them the good news would be proclaimed.

Luke 13:35

34O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those sent to her, how often I have longed to gather your children together as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were unwilling! 35Look, your house is left to you desolate. And I tell you that you will not see Me again until you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord.’

1. If the Sabbath is moral, then why did God grow weary of them keeping it? God never said he was weary of them NOT stealing or NOT committing adultery. But God did say he was could not endure their keeping the Sabbath: Isa 1:13-14 "Bring your worthless offerings no longer, Incense is an abomination to Me. New moon and Sabbath, the calling of assemblies- I cannot endure iniquity and the solemn assembly. I hate your new moon festivals and your appointed feasts. They have become a burden to Me."

Again .... the above is referring to ceremonial laws .... associated with ceremonies within the temple system. Go read the entire chapter of Isaiah 1. Also they clergy had added many of their own rules regarding the Sabbath.

Mark 2:27

Berean Study Bible
Then Jesus declared, “The Sabbath was made for man (mankind not just Jews), not man for the Sabbath.

We are to follow in His steps and His steps included keeping the Sabbath ... and He did so even in His death. You think Him resting in the tomb on the 7th day Sabbath (the special day He created) was a coincidence?

The apostles continued keeping the 7th day Sabbath. Did Jesus forget to tell them it wasn't necessary to?

1 Peter 2

21For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in His footsteps:

Follow the Lamb wherever He goes ;o)

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Is Paul giving Christians license to omit Sabbath observance in Colossians 2:16-17 and Romans 14:5-8? Is this also corroborated by Acts 15:23-29?

These are the passages:

Colossians 2:16-17
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. 17 These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.

Romans 14:5-8
5 One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7 For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. 8 For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's.

Acts 15:23-29
23 with the following letter: “The brothers, both the apostles and the elders, to the brothers[c] who are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia, greetings. 24 Since we have heard that some persons have gone out from us and troubled you[d] with words, unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions, 25 it has seemed good to us, having come to one accord, to choose men and send them to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will tell you the same things by word of mouth. 28 For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: 29 that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.”

Taken together, is a correct conclusion from these passages that Christians are not required to keep the Sabbath? Is Paul giving Christians license to omit Sabbath observance in Colossians 2:16-17 and Romans 14:5-8? Is this also corroborated by Acts 15:23-29?

Absolutely not! That interpretation would contradict all the old and new testament scriptures but let's prove from the scriptures. Many try take these scriptures out of their context to try and make them say things that they do not say. Let's add the context back in and see if they are saying what some misinterpret them to say. We may look at breaking this up to a number of smaller posts and a detailed scripture response for each section....

These are the passages: Colossians 2:16-17 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. 17 These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.

Some try to claim by pulling scripture from context that Paul is teaching in Colossians 2:16-17 that God's 4th commandment is a "shadow law" of the old covenant fulfilled in Christ without considering that there were many different kinds of annual ceremonial "sabbaths" in the old covenant from the Mosaic book of the law that were not God's 4th commandment “seventh day” Sabbath. Some of these annual ceremonial sabbaths that were not God’s 4th commandment and could fall on any day of the week included the ceremonial sabbaths in the feast days and days of holy convocation where no work was to be done.

These ceremonial sabbath(s) and days of holy convocation excluding work included…

(1) Feast of Unleavened Bread (first and last day) *Leviticus 23:6-8
(2) Feast of Trumpets *Leviticus 23:24-25
(3) Day of Atonement *Leviticus 23:27-32
(4) Feast of Booths *Leviticus 23:34-36
(5) Feast of First Fruits *Leviticus 23:39
(6) Feast days of Holy convocation of no work *Leviticus 23:7-8; 21;24; 27; 35-36
(7) Sabbath rest of the land (7-year cycle) *Leviticus 25:2
(8) Sabbath of Jubilee culminating of the 7x7 yearly cycles sabbaths *Leviticus 25:9-54

All of the above of course were different to God’s 4th commandment and could fall on any day of the week unlike Gods’ 4th commandment which is strictly every ) “seventh day” of the week.

(9) God’s Sabbath of the 4th commandment of the 10 commandments which is one of God’s 10 commandments that give us the knowledge of what sin is when broken *Romans 3:20; Romans 7:7; 1 John 3:4; Exodus 20:8-11 and a “memorial” and celebreation of creation and God as the creator of heaven and earth outlined in Genesis 2:1-3.

When these annual ceremonial sabbaths which could fall on any day of the week depending on the yearly cycle, fell on God’s 4th commandment weekly Sabbath it was called a “High Sabbath” as two sabbaths in one (see JOHN 19:31; more here). So one of the questions we need to consider is what sabbath plural was Paul talking about in COLOSSIANS 2:16-17. It cannot be “the Sabbath” of God’s 4th commandment as the Greek application and use in Colossians 2:16 is GNP which means genitive neuter plural meaning plural application. The within chapter and scripture contexts will help to show what sabbaths are being referring to so we will look at both the within chapter and within scripture contexts to help determine the Greek word application.

Greek application of sabbath and word meanings why are they important here?

Keep in mind here that the Greek word for sabbath is σάββατον; sabbaton (G4521). The Greek word for Sabbath unlike the Hebrew has many different meanings and application depending on the context that it is used and can mean; (1). the Sabbath (that is, Shabbath of Gods 4th commandment), or (2) day of weekly repose from secular work; (3) the interval between two Sabbaths; likewise the plural in all the above applications: - sabbath day, or (4) a week.

So with the many meaning and application of the Greek word for sabbath (sabaton) it is the context as to how it is used that determines the application and word meaning. The above is only provided to show that the Greek word for sabbath has many different meanings and applications and is different to the Hebrew meaning which for sabbath is שׁבּת; shabbâth (H7676) which simply means the Sabbath or from one sabbath to another. This word has its' root word in שׁבת; shâbath (H7673) which means to rest, stop work, to cease and celebrate and to keep sabbath.

So why is this important?

The Greek word has a higher use definition which is outside of the Hebrew. For example sabbaton can be applied to the week (not the Sabbath) or any day of weekly repose (ceasing from work) that is not the Sabbath of God's 4th commandment. Sabbaton can also be applied to the intervals between the seventh day sabbath as well as God's 4th commandment seventh day Sabbath.

The questions that need to be considered here to correc are …

(1) How do we know what the Greek word sabbaton is being applied to in Colossian 2:16-17?
(2) What is the within chapter and scripture contexts of Colossians 2:16-17?
(3) What sabbath plural are being referred to in Colossians 2:16-17 and are they shadows?
(4) Is Paul possibly referring to something in the old testament?
(5) How does what Paul is saying in Colossians 2:16-17 link to the scriptures in rest of the bible?

Here in this post we have only touched the surface and have shown through the scriptures alone that there are many different kinds of ceremonial sabbaths of the old testament which include the annual shadow sabbaths in the feast days, the days of holy concovation where no work was to be done and the sabbaths of the land all of which are not God’s 4th commandment of the 10 commandments and can fall on any day of the week.

We have also shown in this post by God’s grace that the Greek word used for sabbath has many meanings and applications determined by the within scripture chapter and contexts and is not always a reference to God’s 4th commandment but can mean simply ceasing from weekly work or a week or the days inbetween the Sabbath as well as God’s 4th commandment Sabbath. Notice that none of the above shared here is considered at all when surface reading Colossians 2:16-17 pulled from it’s contexts to the rest of the old and new testament scriptures.

Lets prayerfully consider the questions above and add the context back into Colossians 2:16-17 to see what these scriptures are really talking about in the coming posts.

God bless.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

In the previous post it was demonstrated through the scriptures alone that;

1. There are many different kinds of ceremonial sabbaths of the old testament which include the annual shadow sabbaths in the feast days, the days of holy concovation where no work was to be done and the sabbaths of the land all of which are not God’s 4th commandment of the 10 commandments and can fall on any day of the week.

2. The Greek word used for sabbath has many meanings and applications determined by the within scripture chapter and contexts and is not always a reference to God’s 4th commandment but can mean simply ceasing from weekly work or a week or the days inbetween the Sabbath as well as God’s 4th commandment Sabbath.

In this post let’s begin to consider the within chapter and scripture context of Colossians 2:16-17 and consider the following questions.

(1) How do we know what sabbaths the Greek word sabbaton is being applied?

The answer to this question of course is the context. Let’s look at the within chapter and scripture contexts.

WHAT IS THE WITHIN SCRIPTURE CONEXT OF COLOSSIANS 2:16?

COLOSSIANS 2:16 [16] Let no man therefore judge you in (1) MEAT, or in DRINK, or in respect of an (2) HOLYDAY [FEASTIVALS], or of the (3) NEW MOON, or of the (4) SABBATH DAYS <plural GNP>

PAUL'S within scriptures CONTEXT and use of COLOSSIANS 2:16-17 is in reference to the OLD TESTAMENT scriptures.

EZEKIEL 45:17 [17] And it shall be the prince's part to give BURNT OFFERINGS, and (1) MEAT OFFERINGS, and DRINK OFFERINGS, in the (2) FEASTS, and in the (3) NEW MOONS, and in the (4) SABBATHS, in all solemnities of the house of Israel: he shall prepare the sin offering, and the meat offering, and the burnt offering, and the peace offerings, to make reconciliation for the house of Israel.

NUMBERS 28 [9] And on the Sabbath day two lambs of the first year without spot, and two tenth deals of flour for a MEAT OFFERING, mingled with oil, and the DRINK OFFERING thereof: [10] This is the burnt offering of EVERY SABBATH, beside the continual BURN'T OFFERING, and his DRINK OFFERING.

ISAIAH 1:10-14 [10] Hear the word of the LORD, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah.[11] To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the LORD: I AM FULL OF THE BURNT OFFERINGS of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats.[12] When ye come to appear before me, who hath required this at your hand, to tread my courts?[13] BRING NO MORE VAIN OBLATIONS; incense is an abomination unto me; THE NEW MOONS AND SABBATHS, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting.[14] Your NEW MOONS and your APPOINTED FEASTS my soul hateth: they are a trouble unto me; I am weary to bear them.

LEVITICUS 23:4 [4] These are THE FEASTS OF THE LORD, even holy convocations, which ye shall proclaim in their seasons. [5] In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is THE LORD'S PASSOVER. [6] And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the Lord: seven days ye must eat unleavened bread…… [13] And the MEAT OFFERING thereof shall be two tenth deals of fine flour mingled with oil, an offering made by fire unto the Lord for a sweet savour: and the DRINK OFFERING thereof shall be of wine, the fourth part of an hin.

HOSEA 2:11 [11], I will also cause all her mirth to CEASE, HER [ISRAEL'S] FEAST DAYS, her NEW MOONS, and HER SABBATHS, and all HER [ISRAELS] SOLEMN FEASTS.

Note in HOSEA the prophecy to put an end to all the end to all the annual feasts and in all the above scripture applications that link directly to Colossians 2:16, the sabbaths being referred to here are always applied the annual feast days, meat and drink offerings, and the new moons? So the scripture context is to the annual sabbaths in the feast days that are shadows of things to come. As shown earlier these annual ceremonial sabbaths or days of holy convocation included (1) Feast of Unleavened Bread (first and last day) *Leviticus 23:6-8 (2) Feast of Trumpets *Leviticus 23:24-25 (3) Day of Atonement *Leviticus 23:27-32 (4) Feast of Booths *Leviticus 23:34-36 (5) Feast of First Fruits *Leviticus 23:39 (6) Feast days of Holy convocation of no work *Leviticus 23:7-8; 21;24; 27; 35-36

WHAT IS PAUL REFERRING TO IN COLOSSIANS 2?

Well of course it is the ceremonial “shadow laws” and the annual ceremonial shadow sabbaths of the Mosaic book of the law. The chapter context of Colossians 2:11-17 is to “circumcision” and “baptism” and the blotting out of the “ordinances that were against us” that were all “shadows of things to come v17.

WHAT IS THE CHAPTER CONTEXT OF COLOSSIANS 2:16-17?

COLOSSIANS 2:11-17
[11], In whom also you are CIRCUMCISION with the CIRCUMCISION made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:
[12], Buried with him in baptism, in which also you are risen with him through the faith of the working of God, who has raised him from the dead.
[13], And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, has he made alive together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
[14], BLOTTING OUT the HANDWRITING of ORDINANCES that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
[15], And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it.
[16], Let no man therefore judge you in FOOD AND DRINK, or in respect of a HOLY DAY [FESTIVAL], or of the NEW MOON, or of the SABBATH DAYS:
[17], Which are a SHADOW OF THINGS TO COME; but the body is of Christ.

Note in v11 the chapter context of Colossians 2:16 is to the shadow laws in the ceremonial ordinance of circumcision pointing to circumcision of the heart made without hands by the circumcision of Christ.

THE SHADOW LAWS FORETOLD IN THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT SCRIPTURES?

DEUTERONOMY 10:16 [16] CIRCUMCISE THERFORE THE FORESKIN OF YOUR HEART, and be no more stiff-necked.

DEUTERONOMY 30:6 [6] And the LORD your God will CIRCUMCISE YOUR HEART AND THE HEART OF YOUR DECENDENCE, TO LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART AND WITH YOU’RE YOUR SOUL, THAT YOU MAY LIVE.

JEREMIAH 4:4 [4] CIRCUMCISE YOURSELF TO THE LORD, AND TAKE AWAY THE FORESKINS OF YOUR HEART, you men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem: lest my fury come forth like fire, and burn that none can quench it, because of the evil of your doings.

Note: new covenant fulfillment of the shadows of the ceremonial ordinance of circumcision pointing the circumcision of the heart through faith in Christ…

ROMANS 2:25-29 [25] For circumcision verily profits, if you keep the law: but if you are a breaker of the law, your circumcision is made uncircumcision. [26], Therefore if the uncircumcision keeps the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? [27], And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfils the law, judge you, who by the letter and circumcision do transgress the law? [28], FOR HE IS NOT A JEW, WHO IS ONE; NEITHER IS THAT CIRCUMCISION, WHICH IS OF THE OUTWARD FLESH: [29], BUT HE IS A JEW WHICH IS ONE INWARDLY; AND CIRCUMCISION IS THAT OF THE HEART, IN THE SPIRIT AND NOT IN THE LETTER; WHOSE PRAISE IS NOT OF MEN BUT OF GOD.

1 CORITHIANS 7:19 [19] CIRCUMCISION IS NOTHING, AND UNCIRCUMCISION IS NOTHING, BUT THE KEEPING OF THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD.

This is the operation of GOD in the NEW COVENANT…

HEBREWS 8:10 [10], For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord; I WILL PUT MY LAWS INTO THEIR MINDS, AND WRITE THEM IN THEIR HEARTS [NOTE: THE SHADOW OF CIRCUMCSION]: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

CONCLUSION; The chapter contexts of Colossians 2 is to the ceremonial ordinance of circumcision, baptism laws in ordinances that are a shadow of things to come pointing to a new heart to love and obey God in the new covenant not God’s 10 commandments of God’s 4th commandment.

……………..

Now that we know what Colossians 2:16-17 is referring to let’s look at other scriptures by Paul on the same subject matter here…

HEBREWS 9:1-12 [1] Then verily THE FIRST COVENANT HAD ALSO ORDINANCES of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.... [9] WHICH WAS A FIGURE for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;[10] WHICH STOOD ONLY IN MEATS AND DRINKS, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.[12] NEITHER BY THE BLOOD OF GOATS AND CALVES, BUT BY HIS OWN BLOOD he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

HEBREWS 10:1-9
[1], FOR THE LAW HAVING A SHADOW OF GOOD THINGS TO COME, AND NOT THE VERY IMAGE OF THE THINGS, CAN NEVER WITH THOSE SACRIFICES which they offered YEAR BY YEAR continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
[2], For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.
[3], But in those SACRIFICES there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.
[4], For it is not possible that THE BLOOD OF BULLS AND GOATS should take away sins.
[5], Why when he comes into the world, he said, SACRIFICES AND OFFERINGS YOU WOULD NOT BUT A BODY YOU HAVE PREPARED FOR ME:
[6], IN BURN'T OFFERINGS AND SACRIFICES FOR SIN YOU HAVE HAD NO PLEASURE.
[7], Then said I, See, I come in the VOLUME OF THE BOOK IT IS WRITTEN OF ME, to do your will, O God.
[8], Above when he said, SACRIFICES AND OFFERINGS AND BURNT OFFERINGS AND OFFERINGS FOR SIN YOU WOULD NOT, neither had pleasure therein; WHICH ARE OFFERED BY THE LAW;
[9], Then said he, See, I come to do your will, O God. He takes away the first, that he may establish the second.

NOTE; the LAW in reference here is NOT God's 10 Commandments but the law of sin offerings from the SHADOW laws of the MOSAIC BOOK of the LAW *DEUTERONOMY 31:24-26 from the OLD COVENANT *EXODUS 24:7 (Please look at the attached scriptures)

……………

CONCLUSION: Context matters dear friend. Colossians 2:16-17 is in reference to the context of the annual sabbaths in the feast days connected to the meat and drink offerings, the annual feast days, the new moons which were all shadows of things to come but the body is of Christ. Colossians 2 has nothing to do with God’s 4th commandment or God’s 10 commandments.

Hope this helps.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Romans 14:5-8 5 One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7 For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. 8 For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's.

Once again more scripture that people try to pull from context to claim that we no longer need to keep God’s 4th commandment of God’s 10 commandments, but lets look at the detail from the scriptures. The question that can settle this once and for all is where in all of Roman 14 does it say or teach anywhere that God’s 4th commandment is abolished and we are now commanded to keep any day as a Holy day? If one reads the chapter they will find no such scripture to to come up with Romans 14 referring to God's 4th commandment they need to read the Sabbath which is not in the chapter into the scriptures.

Let's be honest? Where is the scripture that shows that Romans 14 is talking about God’s 4th commandment Sabbath? You will not find any scripture in the whole chapter of Romans 14. When reading Romans 14 you will see that the context is to eating and not eating on days that men esteem over other days and judging others in this regards. These scriptures are not talking about days that God esteems but days men esteem and the scriptures teach the things that men esteem are an abomination in Gods eyes *LUKE 16:15.

Romans 14 is not talking about God’s 4th commandment Sabbath of the 10 commandments or is it talking about any one of God’s 10 commandments and there is no scripture linking Romans 14 to God’s 4th commandment of the 10 commandment that give us the knowledge of what sin is when broken *ROMANS 3:20; ROMANS 7:7; 1 JOHN 3:4.

SOME POINTS TO CONSIDER IN ROMANS 14:1-23

[1] the days spoken of are associated with eating/drinking, not eating/not drinking.

[2] the matter is over those 'weak' and 'strong' in faith concerning eating/drinking and days to do and not do those things on

[3] the context deals with "One man esteemeth", and not what God esteems (Isaiah 56:1-8, 58:13; Psalms 89:34) as permanent and so, and God's word is clear about what men esteem:

Luke 16:15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.

The Jews continually argued over which were better days to do this thing or that thing, like fasting, feasting, etc: [Matthew 9:14; Mark 2:18; Luke 5:33, 18:12 KJB]

[4] the words for sabbath is not present in all of Romans 14, neither in all of Romans

[5] the words of the seventh day is not present in all of Romans 14, neither in all of Romans

[6] the words for the Lord's day is not present in all of Romans 14, neither in all of Romans

[7] Romans 14 is in the context of Romans 13, which directly cites the latter (2nd) table of the Ten Commandments, for love to neighbour, which is also found in Leviticus 19:17-18, in the context of sin and the Ten Commandments

[8] Romans 15 is the other end, and when combined with 1 Corinthians 8-10, the context is clear that the sabbath of the LORD thy God (Exodus 20:8-11) is not in view in the least, and is sustained by the rest of Paul in Romans by his statements on the eternal spiritual, holy, just and good Law (Exodus 20:1-17) of God, which identifies what sin is (Romans 7:7; 1 John 3:4)

[9] the entire context of Romans 14 is to do nothing (even if allowed normally, yet not under special circumstances) to cause others to sin:

Romans 14:13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.

[10] Paul never contradicts himself, and Paul's writings are scripture (2 Peter 3:16), and scripture cannot be broken, John 10:35) and does not teach transgression of God's Law (Exodus 20:1-17) at any point:

Romans 6:1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?

Romans 6:2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

Romans 6:15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.

Romans7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

[11] the words for "law", "commandments" are never used in Romans 14

[12] Paul in numerous places lists and upholds every single one of the Ten Commandments in the NT, including the 4th Commandment (Genesis 2:1-3; Exodus 20:8-11) in Hebrews 3-4, etc.

[13] Romans 14 is about excluding those things which were "doubful disputations", and not a single one of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:1-17) were ever doubtful or to be disputed in any place in all of scripture (KJB), for the Commandment of God are "sure" (Psalms 111:7).

[14] the words for "covenant/testament" are never used in Romans 14

[15] the words for 'first [day] of the week' are never used in Romans 14, neither in all of Romans

[16] none of the 'Sunday' (first [day] of the week) churches use Romans 14 to teach that I may ignore the day they gather on, even though that day is not sanctified by God in any way what so ever in scripture (KJB), and is never called "the Lord's day" in scripture, neither is it "the seventh day the sabbath of the LORD thy God".

[17] nobody uses Romans 14 to teach I can simply stop eating/drinking on every day

[18] anyone who quotes Romans 14, has in mind 'restrictions', rather than allowances

....................

CONCLUSION: Nothing about God's 4th commandment in there at all. The scriptures are talking about food connected to days (eating and not eating (fasting) on days men esteem over other days. Not what days God esteems and judging others.

The things that men esteem are an abomination in God's eyes.

LUKE 16:15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God

There is no mention in all of ROMANS 14 of God's 4th commandment or any of God's 10 commandments. Your reading into the scriptures something it is not talking about.

Hope this helps.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Acts 15:23-29 23 with the following letter: “The brothers, both the apostles and the elders, to the brothers[c] who are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia, greetings. 24 Since we have heard that some persons have gone out from us and troubled you[d] with words, unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions, 25 it has seemed good to us, having come to one accord, to choose men and send them to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will tell you the same things by word of mouth. 28 For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: 29 that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.”

For me this is quite amazing that some would try and use these scriptures once again taken out of their context to claim that gentile believers do not have an obligation to keep God’s 10 commandments. Simply reading the rest of the bible proves this interpretation in error, but we do not even need to provide these many scriptures showing that all of God’s 10 commandments are a requirement for all who name the name of JESUS and are repeated all though the new testament scriptures spoken by JESUS and the Apostles.

All one needs to do here to determine what is being discussed in ACTS 15 is to simply read the chapter contexts to see that these claims are not true.

Now let's add back in the CONTEXT left out of ACTS 15:23-29 that shows this error and false teaching that makes Paul contradict himself.

WHAT IS THE QUESTION THAT ACTS 15 IS CONSIDERING?

ACTS 15:1:21
[1], And certain men who came down from Judea taught the brethren, and said, EXCEPT YOU BE CIRCUMCISED AFTER THE MANNER OF MOSES YOU CANNOT BE SAVED.

NOTE: ACTS 15:1 is the question that needs to be answered and the topic of conversation and CONTEXT of the chapter of ACTS 15. Here we have Jewish believers coming to Paul and Barnabas saying if the new GENTILES believers are not circumcised and made proselytes then they cannot be saved. This is the chapter context and issue of contention.

[2], When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and dispute with them, THEY DETERMINED THAT PAUL AND BARNABAS AND CERTAIN OF THEM SHOULD GO UP TO JERUSALEM UNTO THE APOSLTLES AND ELDERS ABOUT THIS QUESTION.

NOTE: ACTS 15:2 Which question? Weather your salvation depends on being CIRCUMCISED.

They then travelled to Jerusalem about this question to determine if new gentile believers needed to be CIRCUMCISED in order to be saved. Once they got to Jerusalem, the question was then asked and the discussion continued with the Pharisees stating their case first..

[5], But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees who believed, saying, It is needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

NOTE: KEEP in mind here the question was never over if gentile believers should obey God's 10 Commandments but to keep the Shadow laws of Moses, in this case CIRCUMCISION as a means of salvation. CIRCUMCIONS is from the law of MOSES not God’s 10 Commandments written by God on two tables of stone.

[6], And the apostles and elders came together TO CONSIDER THIS MATTER.

NOTE: Again the topic of discussion and chapter CONTEXT that is being considered is the question stated in ACTS 15:1 which was IS CIRCUMCISION A REQUIREMENT OF SALVATION?

[7], And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, you know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.

[8], And God, who knows the hearts, bore them witness, giving them the Holy Spirit, even as he did unto us;

NOTE: After much discussion between the Apostles, Peter then rose up showing that God gave the gentile believers the Holy Spirit being UNCIRCUMCISED.

[9], And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.

[10], Now therefore why test God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

[11], But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

NOTE: They came to the conclusion then that salvation is not by being circumcised but be what circumcision pointed to. A new heart by faith. This is made plain latter in other scripture written by PAUL here...

ROMANS 2 [25] For circumcision verily profits, if you keep the law: but if you are a breaker of the law, your circumcision is made uncircumcision. [26], Therefore if the uncircumcision keeps the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? [27], And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfils the law, judge you, who by the letter and circumcision do transgress the law? [28], FOR HE IS NOT A JEW, WHO IS ONE; NEITHER IS THAT CIRCUMCISION, WHICH IS OF THE OUTWARD FLESH: [29], BUT HE IS A JEW WHICH IS ONE INWARDLY; AND CIRCUMCISION IS THAT OF THE HEART, IN THE SPIRIT AND NOT IN THE LETTER; WHOSE PRAISE IS NOT OF MEN BUT OF GOD.

If ACTS 15 was talking about the 10 Commandments then Pauls writings in to the CORINTHIANS do not make any sense.

1 CORITHIANS 7 [19] CIRCUMCISION IS NOTHING, AND UNCIRCUMCISION IS NOTHING, BUT THE KEEPING OF THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD.

The scripture above is a contradiction of how some interpret the outcome of ACTS 15. You do not believe Dan, that we are now free to break any of God's 10 Commandments now do you?

[12], Then all the multitude kept silence, and listened to Barnabas and Paul declaring what miracles and wonders God had done among the Gentiles by them.
[13], And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me:
[14], Simeon has declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.
[15], And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,
[16], After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:
[17], That the rest of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, says the Lord, who does all these things.
[18], Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.

[19], THEREFORE MY JUDGMENT IS THAT WE TROUBLE NOT THEM WHO FROM THE GENTILES ARE TURNED TO GOD:
[20], BUT WRITE UNTO THEM THAT THEY ABSTAIN FROM THE DEFILEMENT OF IDOLS, FORNICATION AND THINGS STRANGLED AND FROM BLOOD.

NOTE: JAMES conclusion is that new Gentile believers should not be troubled with CIRCUMCISION as a requirement of salvation which was the matter being considered and the question being discussion as shown in *ACTS 15:1-2; ACTS 15:6 but asks them to abstain from idols, fornication and from things strangled and from blood.

[21], FOR MOSES OF OLD TIME HAS IN EVERY CITY THEM THAT PREACH HIM, BEING READ IN THE SYNAGOGUES EVERY SABBATH.

NOTE: The reason why JAMES sends this letter to the new Gentile believers is that they would continue learning God's WORD EVERY SABBATH.

……………

CONCLUSION So the conclusion of the matter with CONTEXT added back in is fould in v19-20 We are not to trouble the new gentile believers with CIRCUMCISION as a means of salvation. They are new converts that will learn more about GOD'S WORD when? EVERY SABBATH. In the meantime you should abstain from anything offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication.

NOPE nothing written about the 10 Commandments being abolished in this chapter. Here is what PAUL says of the matter here...

1 CORITHIANS 7 [19] CIRCUMCISION IS NOTHING, AND UNCIRCUMCISION IS NOTHING, BUT THE KEEPING OF THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD.

ACTS 15 is about “CIRCUMCISION” as a requirement for salvation and is not even considering Gods 10 Commandments. “Circumcision” is one of the shadow laws of the MOSAIC BOOK of the COVENANT.

Taken together, is a correct conclusion from these passages that Christians are not required to keep the Sabbath?

As shown through the scriptures above when the context is added these scriptures say no such thing and there is not one scripture in all of God’s Word that says God’s 4th commandment has been abolished and we are now commanded to keep Sunday as a Holy day. This is a teaching and tradition of men that breaks the commandments of God that JESUS warns us about in Matthew 15:3-9.

Hope this helps. Everything is much clearer when the context is not left out.

 

[TruthSeek3r]

Absolutely not! That interpretation would contradict all the old and new testament scriptures but let's prove from the scriptures. Many try take these scriptures out of their context to try and make them say things that they do not say. Let's add the context back in and see if they are saying what some misinterpret them to say. We may look at breaking this up to a number of smaller posts and a detailed scripture response for each section....

Some try to claim by pulling scripture from context that Paul is teaching in Colossians 2:16-17 that God's 4th commandment is a "shadow law" of the old covenant fulfilled in Christ without considering that there were many different kinds of annual ceremonial "sabbaths" in the old covenant from the Mosaic book of the law that were not God's 4th commandment “seventh day” Sabbath. Some of these annual ceremonial sabbaths that were not God’s 4th commandment and could fall on any day of the week included the ceremonial sabbaths in the feast days and days of holy convocation where no work was to be done.

These ceremonial sabbath(s) and days of holy convocation excluding work included…

(1) Feast of Unleavened Bread (first and last day) *Leviticus 23:6-8
(2) Feast of Trumpets *Leviticus 23:24-25
(3) Day of Atonement *Leviticus 23:27-32
(4) Feast of Booths *Leviticus 23:34-36
(5) Feast of First Fruits *Leviticus 23:39
(6) Feast days of Holy convocation of no work *Leviticus 23:7-8; 21;24; 27; 35-36
(7) Sabbath rest of the land (7-year cycle) *Leviticus 25:2
(8) Sabbath of Jubilee culminating of the 7x7 yearly cycles sabbaths *Leviticus 25:9-54

All of the above of course were different to God’s 4th commandment and could fall on any day of the week unlike Gods’ 4th commandment which is strictly every ) “seventh day” of the week.

(9) God’s Sabbath of the 4th commandment of the 10 commandments which is one of God’s 10 commandments that give us the knowledge of what sin is when broken *Romans 3:20; Romans 7:7; 1 John 3:4; Exodus 20:8-11 and a “memorial” and celebreation of creation and God as the creator of heaven and earth outlined in Genesis 2:1-3.

When these annual ceremonial sabbaths which could fall on any day of the week depending on the yearly cycle, fell on God’s 4th commandment weekly Sabbath it was called a “High Sabbath” as two sabbaths in one (see JOHN 19:31; more here). So one of the questions we need to consider is what sabbath plural was Paul talking about in COLOSSIANS 2:16-17. It cannot be “the Sabbath” of God’s 4th commandment as the Greek application and use in Colossians 2:16 is GNP which means genitive neuter plural meaning plural application. The within chapter and scripture contexts will help to show what sabbaths are being referring to so we will look at both the within chapter and within scripture contexts to help determine the Greek word application.

Greek application of sabbath and word meanings why are they important here?

Keep in mind here that the Greek word for sabbath is σάββατον; sabbaton (G4521). The Greek word for Sabbath unlike the Hebrew has many different meanings and application depending on the context that it is used and can mean; (1). the Sabbath (that is, Shabbath of Gods 4th commandment), or (2) day of weekly repose from secular work; (3) the interval between two Sabbaths; likewise the plural in all the above applications: - sabbath day, or (4) a week.

So with the many meaning and application of the Greek word for sabbath (sabaton) it is the context as to how it is used that determines the application and word meaning. The above is only provided to show that the Greek word for sabbath has many different meanings and applications and is different to the Hebrew meaning which for sabbath is שׁבּת; shabbâth (H7676) which simply means the Sabbath or from one sabbath to another. This word has its' root word in שׁבת; shâbath (H7673) which means to rest, stop work, to cease and celebrate and to keep sabbath.

So why is this important?

The Greek word has a higher use definition which is outside of the Hebrew. For example sabbaton can be applied to the week (not the Sabbath) or any day of weekly repose (ceasing from work) that is not the Sabbath of God's 4th commandment. Sabbaton can also be applied to the intervals between the seventh day sabbath as well as God's 4th commandment seventh day Sabbath.

The questions that need to be considered here to correc are …

(1) How do we know what the Greek word sabbaton is being applied to in Colossian 2:16-17?
(2) What is the within chapter and scripture contexts of Colossians 2:16-17?
(3) What sabbath plural are being referred to in Colossians 2:16-17 and are they shadows?
(4) Is Paul possibly referring to something in the old testament?
(5) How does what Paul is saying in Colossians 2:16-17 link to the scriptures in rest of the bible?

Here in this post we have only touched the surface and have shown through the scriptures alone that there are many different kinds of ceremonial sabbaths of the old testament which include the annual shadow sabbaths in the feast days, the days of holy concovation where no work was to be done and the sabbaths of the land all of which are not God’s 4th commandment of the 10 commandments and can fall on any day of the week.

We have also shown in this post by God’s grace that the Greek word used for sabbath has many meanings and applications determined by the within scripture chapter and contexts and is not always a reference to God’s 4th commandment but can mean simply ceasing from weekly work or a week or the days inbetween the Sabbath as well as God’s 4th commandment Sabbath. Notice that none of the above shared here is considered at all when surface reading Colossians 2:16-17 pulled from it’s contexts to the rest of the old and new testament scriptures.

Lets prayerfully consider the questions above and add the context back into Colossians 2:16-17 to see what these scriptures are really talking about in the coming posts.

God bless.

I think Hermeneutics StackExchange is a more reliable source. Let's see what the most upvoted answer says:

Question: Colossians 2:16 speaks of holy days, festivals or weekly sabbaths?

Most upvoted answer (copy-paste below):

Scriptural context must be the primary driver for the answer, particularly because this section starts with "therefore". Paul's admonition to "let no one pass judgment" springs forth from verses 2:1-15. In 2:1-5, he desires to visit them "face-to-face" so that they may have a "...full assurance of understand and the knowledge of God's mystery, which is Christ..."...in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge." Why? So "...that no one may delude [them] with plausible arguments." Paul was seeking to protect them from false teaching by helping them to understand, and have full knowledge of, Christ.

This then leads to V8, where he admonishes them to ensure they are not taken “…captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.” This, I believe, is the key to this context: Paul juxtaposes Christ himself with philosophy and deceit that is according to “human tradition” and ungodly, worldly spirits. There are teachings being put forth that are fundamentally opposed to truth, to Christ.

Paul goes on to explain this by fleshing out who the Christ is and what the Colossians have in him. He is fully God in the flesh (V9) having all rule and authority (V10). They are filled in him (V9), not lacking in anything (from a righteousness perspective). Why? Because they were also circumcised in Jesus Christ (V11). To be as concise as possible, V11-15 are asserting that, because Jesus was cut off, or circumcised on their behalf, they are fully righteous, lacking in nothing in terms of their position / justification before God. By his becoming sin for them (2 Cor 5:21) and nailing their sin debt (taken into himself) on the cross (V14), taking on the curse of the Law for them (Gal 3:10-14), they have “...been made alive with [Jesus], having forgiven [them] all [their] trespasses.” This is the context of V16 and following.

Therefore, since they are filled up with Christ, being made once-for-all perfect (Hebrews 7:27), they need to add nothing to themselves in terms of righteousness, in law-keeping: their justification or standing before God. Why? Because in Jesus, they are already perfect as to the Law. In fact, Paul makes it clear in Galatians that those who are in Christ are in fact no longer under the law, it having been fulfilled in Christ’s obedience, and they are reckoned perfect in God’s sight having received Jesus’ perfect obedience as being credited to them. (See Romans 3-4 as well.)

So, being that this is the context, when Paul indicates that they should “…let no one pass judgment on [them] in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath”, he must be speaking to the fact that these things, regardless of their origin (Jewish holidays or official Sabbath days of rest), are no longer relevant to the Colossians in terms of their standing before God. These things no longer apply to them as needing to be done under the Law or as a command of God to please him. So, if they are not participating in these things, or if the elect to do so out of worship for God, they should no longer let others tell them they are judged before God for do or not doing so. Their standing before God does not depend upon these things, but upon what they already have in the Beloved.

In conclusion, to answer your question directly, I understand the historical context here to be that Jews, AKA “Judaizers”, were indicating to the church that at least some of the Old Covenant Law must be added onto Christ for them to be accepted by God, that they were still requirements for Christians that must be obeyed. This, however, in Paul’s (and therefore Christ’s) mind, completely antithetical to that which Christ had already accomplished in both his perfect life and substitutionary death. Here is a commentary that go into more depth.​

 

[LoveGodsWord]

I think Hermeneutics StackExchange is a more reliable source. Let's see what the most upvoted answer says:

Question: Colossians 2:16 speaks of holy days, festivals or weekly sabbaths?

Most upvoted answer (copy-paste below):

Scriptural context must be the primary driver for the answer, particularly because this section starts with "therefore". Paul's admonition to "let no one pass judgment" springs forth from verses 2:1-15. In 2:1-5, he desires to visit them "face-to-face" so that they may have a "...full assurance of understand and the knowledge of God's mystery, which is Christ..."...in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge." Why? So "...that no one may delude [them] with plausible arguments." Paul was seeking to protect them from false teaching by helping them to understand, and have full knowledge of, Christ.

This then leads to V8, where he admonishes them to ensure they are not taken “…captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.” This, I believe, is the key to this context: Paul juxtaposes Christ himself with philosophy and deceit that is according to “human tradition” and ungodly, worldly spirits. There are teachings being put forth that are fundamentally opposed to truth, to Christ.

Paul goes on to explain this by fleshing out who the Christ is and what the Colossians have in him. He is fully God in the flesh (V9) having all rule and authority (V10). They are filled in him (V9), not lacking in anything (from a righteousness perspective). Why? Because they were also circumcised in Jesus Christ (V11). To be as concise as possible, V11-15 are asserting that, because Jesus was cut off, or circumcised on their behalf, they are fully righteous, lacking in nothing in terms of their position / justification before God. By his becoming sin for them (2 Cor 5:21) and nailing their sin debt (taken into himself) on the cross (V14), taking on the curse of the Law for them (Gal 3:10-14), they have “...been made alive with [Jesus], having forgiven [them] all [their] trespasses.” This is the context of V16 and following.

Therefore, since they are filled up with Christ, being made once-for-all perfect (Hebrews 7:27), they need to add nothing to themselves in terms of righteousness, in law-keeping: their justification or standing before God. Why? Because in Jesus, they are already perfect as to the Law. In fact, Paul makes it clear in Galatians that those who are in Christ are in fact no longer under the law, it having been fulfilled in Christ’s obedience, and they are reckoned perfect in God’s sight having received Jesus’ perfect obedience as being credited to them. (See Romans 3-4 as well.)

So, being that this is the context, when Paul indicates that they should “…let no one pass judgment on [them] in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath”, he must be speaking to the fact that these things, regardless of their origin (Jewish holidays or official Sabbath days of rest), are no longer relevant to the Colossians in terms of their standing before God. These things no longer apply to them as needing to be done under the Law or as a command of God to please him. So, if they are not participating in these things, or if the elect to do so out of worship for God, they should no longer let others tell them they are judged before God for do or not doing so. Their standing before God does not depend upon these things, but upon what they already have in the Beloved.

In conclusion, to answer your question directly, I understand the historical context here to be that Jews, AKA “Judaizers”, were indicating to the church that at least some of the Old Covenant Law must be added onto Christ for them to be accepted by God, that they were still requirements for Christians that must be obeyed. This, however, in Paul’s (and therefore Christ’s) mind, completely antithetical to that which Christ had already accomplished in both his perfect life and substitutionary death. Here is a commentary that go into more depth.​

Nothing personal but nothing you have provided here in this post addresses anything in the detailed exegesis of what has already been shared here in this thread. Sorry dear friend, but I will stick with the detailed exegesis already provided here that evaluates both the within chapter and within scripture contexts as well as the Greek and Hebrew applications of the word meanings with direct contrasts to both the old and new testament scriptures Paul is referring to already applied that proves your cut and paste in error.

We could also add the commentaries from Greek scholars but even these do not agree. If you disagree with what has been shared with you here then my challenge to you would be to prove it. If you cannot sorry your hand waiving does not cut it with me and is simply quite telling that you simply do not have a response except to post something unrelated to the scripture content that is provided here.

May God bless you dear friend, as you seek him through his Word. Ignoring it does not make it disappear. It becomes our judge come judgement day according to the scriptures *JOHN 12:47-48

 

[TruthSeek3r]

[5], But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees who believed, saying, It is needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

NOTE: KEEP in mind here the question was never over if gentile believers should obey God's 10 Commandments but to keep the Shadow laws of Moses, in this case CIRCUMCISION as a means of salvation. CIRCUMCIONS is from the law of MOSES not God’s 10 Commandments written by God on two tables of stone.

Your reasoning begins to fall apart here.

1) First of all, The Law of Moses (Hebrew: תֹּורַת מֹשֶׁה‎ Torat Moshe), also called the Mosaic Law, primarily refers to the Torah or the first five books of the Hebrew Bible (source). Therefore, the 10 Commandments are part of the Law of Moses. Your claim that "Shadow laws of Moses" do not include the ten commandments is completely baseless, in fact, totally refuted. Can you share one reputable unbiased source backing up such a claim?

2) Verse 5 clearly states: But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees who believed, saying, It is needful to circumcise them, AND to command them to keep the law of Moses.

There is an AND my friend. The initial trigger of the whole discussion was circumcision, I agree, but then the whole discussion expanded into the whole Mosaic Law (which again, is synonymous with Torah, which includes the 10 commandments, please see the source). That happens in conversations and discussions all the time. You begin discussing topic X, but as you continue the discussion ends up addressing topics A, B, C, D, etc. The whole assembly ended up debating about whether the Gentiles should keep the the Law of Moses or not. Also check out this link for further support.

3) If the previous point by itself is not enough (though it is), in verses 6 to 11 we read:

6 The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 7 After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: “Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8 God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9 He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10 Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear? 11 No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”

If the "much discussion" was only about circumcision (which only takes a few minutes to perform), how come that Peter considers it "a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear"? Circumcision is a trivial thing, it only takes a few minutes and then you can forget about it for the rest of your life. How come Peter considers it an unbearable yoke? Because they were talking about the whole Law of Moses, as verse 5 already made it explicit (duh).

1 CORITHIANS 7 [19] CIRCUMCISION IS NOTHING, AND UNCIRCUMCISION IS NOTHING, BUT THE KEEPING OF THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD.

The scripture above is a contradiction of how some interpret the outcome of ACTS 15. You do not believe Dan, that we are now free to break any of God's 10 Commandments now do you?

Where in the text does it say that Paul is talking about the 10 commandments? You are making the text out to say something that it doesn't. Read the context:

1 Corinthians 7:17-24
17 Nevertheless, each person should live as a believer in whatever situation the Lord has assigned to them, just as God has called them. This is the rule I lay down in all the churches. 18 Was a man already circumcised when he was called? He should not become uncircumcised. Was a man uncircumcised when he was called? He should not be circumcised. 19 Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God’s commands is what counts. 20 Each person should remain in the situation they were in when God called them. 21 Were you a slave when you were called? Don’t let it trouble you—although if you can gain your freedom, do so. 22 For the one who was a slave when called to faith in the Lord is the Lord’s freed person; similarly, the one who was free when called is Christ’s slave. 23 You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of human beings. 24 Brothers and sisters, each person, as responsible to God, should remain in the situation they were in when God called them.

The context clearly shows that Paul is talking about the personal calling of each individual, and therefore the individual commandments that each individual receives (as it should be for someone who is constantly receiving instructions from God in their individual calling by the Holy Spirit indwelling them). The context never mentions the 10 commandments, let alone the Sabbath.

 

[TruthSeek3r]

Nothing personal but nothing you have provided here addresses anything in the more detailed exegesis of what has already been shared in this thread. Sorry dear friend, but I will stick with the detailed exegesis already provided here that evaluates both the within chapter and within scripture contexts as well as the Greek and Hebrew applications of the word meanings with direct contrasts to both the old and new testament scriptures Paul is referring to already applied that proves your cut and paste in error. We could also add the commentaries from Greek scholars but even these do not agree. If you disagree with what has been shared with you here then my challenge to you would be to prove it. If you cannot sorry your hand waiving does not cut it with me and is simply quite telling that you simply do not have a response except to post something unrelated to the scripture content that is provided here. May God bless you dear friend, as you seek him through his Word. Ignoring it does not make it disappear. It becomes our judge come judgement day according to the scriptures *JOHN 12:47-48

Read the response I just finished up typing in post #15

 

[TruthSeek3r]

Nothing personal but nothing you have provided here addresses anything in the more detailed exegesis of what has already been shared in this thread. Sorry dear friend, but I will stick with the detailed exegesis already provided here that evaluates both the within chapter and within scripture contexts as well as the Greek and Hebrew applications of the word meanings with direct contrasts to both the old and new testament scriptures Paul is referring to already applied that proves your cut and paste in error. We could also add the commentaries from Greek scholars but even these do not agree. If you disagree with what has been shared with you here then my challenge to you would be to prove it. If you cannot sorry your hand waiving does not cut it with me and is simply quite telling that you simply do not have a response except to post something unrelated to the scripture content that is provided here. May God bless you dear friend, as you seek him through his Word. Ignoring it does not make it disappear. It becomes our judge come judgement day according to the scriptures *JOHN 12:47-48

Also, I challenge you to post your alleged exegesis about Colossians 2:16 on Hermenutics StackExchange so that it can be peer reviewed by the community. Post your answer here: Colossians 2:16 speaks of holy days, festivals or weekly sabbaths?. It's very easy to create an account and post an answer. And you have the answer pretty much already written, you will only need to edit it a little bit to make it work with the markdown formatting used by the site. It shouldn't take you more than a few minutes. Let me know when you do it.

 

[Soyeong]

Is Paul giving Christians license to omit Sabbath observance in Colossians 2:16-17 and Romans 14:5-8? Is this also corroborated by Acts 15:23-29?

These are the passages:

Colossians 2:16-17
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. 17 These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.

In Colossians 2:16-23, Paul described the people who were judging them as teaching human traditions and precepts, self-made religion, asceticism, and severity to the body, so they were being judged by pagans. This means that the Colossians were keeping God's holy days in obedience to His commands in accordance with the example that Christ set for us to follow and Paul was encouraging them not to let any man judge them and keep them from obeying God.

Romans 14:5-8
5 One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7 For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. 8 For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's.

This passage notable does not say anything about the Sabbath precisely because it had nothing to do with the topic that Paul was discussing in the chapter. In Romans 14:1, he was speaking in regard to how to handle disputable matter of opinion, not in regard to whether followers of God should follow God, so again it is good to avoid mistaking things that were only said against obyeing man as being against obeying God.

Acts 15:23-29
23 with the following letter: “The brothers, both the apostles and the elders, to the brothers[c] who are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia, greetings. 24 Since we have heard that some persons have gone out from us and troubled you[d] with words, unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions, 25 it has seemed good to us, having come to one accord, to choose men and send them to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will tell you the same things by word of mouth. 28 For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: 29 that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.”

Taken together, is a correct conclusion from these passages that Christians are not required to keep the Sabbath?

In Acts 15:21, the expectation was that Gentiles would continue to learn about how to obey Moses every Sabbath in the synagogues, which implies that they were already keeping the Sabbath in obedience to God's command in accordance with the example that Christ set for us to follow. Paul and Jerusalem Council were not enemies of God and did not have the authority to countermand Him, so they should not be interpreted in ways that make them out to be speaking against obeying what God has commanded.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Your reasoning begins to fall apart here.

I guess this is your response to my post covering ACTS 15 from post # 12 linked. Let's look at your claims here that the scriptures provided in post # 12 fall apart and if this claim has any truth in it based on what your have provided here. Keep in mind what was provided in post # 12 were the scripture contexts you disregarded proving that the context and topic of discussion and the answer to the question being considered was "Is circumcision a requirement of salvation"? This is proven without doubt from the scriptures alone in ACTS OF THE APOSTLES 15:1-2 [1], And certain men who came down from Judea taught the brethren, and said, EXCEPT YOU BE CIRCUMCISED AFTER THE MANNER OF MOSES YOU CANNOT BE SAVED.

NOTE: ACTS 15:1-2 is the question that needs to be answered and the topic of conversation and CONTEXT of the chapter of ACTS 15. Here we have Jewish believers coming to Paul and Barnabas saying if the new GENTILES believers are not circumcised and made proselytes then they cannot be saved. This is the chapter context and issue of contention.

[2], When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and dispute with them, THEY DETERMINED THAT PAUL AND BARNABAS AND CERTAIN OF THEM SHOULD GO UP TO JERUSALEM UNTO THE APOSTLES AND ELDERS ABOUT THIS QUESTION.

The chapter context and topic of discussion was never are God's 10 commandments are requirement for Christian living. The question was in circumcision a requirement for salvation. The interpretation of Acts 15 being to the 10 commandments makes Paul and the rest of the bible contradict itself and is not biblical. Paul even goes on some time after this event to write to the Corinthians saying....

1 CORINTHIANS 7 [19] CIRCUMCISION IS NOTHING, AND UNCIRCUMCISION IS NOTHING, BUT THE KEEPING OF THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD.

This is a contradiction to the interpretation of ACTS 15 you are putting fourth and a teaching that is not biblical once the context has been added back as shown through the scriptures above and elsewhere already.

1) First of all, The Law of Moses (Hebrew: תֹּורַת מֹשֶׁה‎ Torat Moshe), also called the Mosaic Law, primarily refers to the Torah or the first five books of the Hebrew Bible (source). Therefore, the 10 Commandments are part of the Law of Moses. Your claim that "Shadow laws of Moses" do not include the ten commandments is completely baseless, in fact, totally refuted. Can you share one reputable unbiased source backing up such a claim?

The law is Moses is called the Mosaic law or the book of the law *Deuteronomy 31:26; or the book of the covenant because Moses wrote it under God's direction *Deuteronomy 31:24-26. It is also called the Torah which include the first five books of the bible (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy). Much of the book of the laws contains the "shadow" ceremonial laws in ordinances of the old covenant for remission of sins and other shadowes fulfilled in Christ (e.g. circumcision, annual feast days, ceremonial laws of the Levitical priesthood, sin offerings and animal sacrifices and sanctuary service and laws for remission of sins). These are are the "shadow laws" which are all written in the Mosiac book of the covenant *Exodus 24:7 and fulfilled in the new covenant (see Hebrews 7; Hebrews 8; Hebrews 9 and Hebrews 10).

This book of the law is not the same as God's law (10 commandments) *Nehemiah 10:29 that were the work of God alone that was spoken *Exodus 20:1-17 and written by God alone with God's own finger on two tables of stone *Exodus 32:16 and placed inside the Ark of the covenant *Deuteronomy 10:5; Exodus 25:16.

Collectively both God's law (ten commandments) and the Mosaic book of the law made up the old covenant *Exodus 24:7; Exodus 34:28. God separated both the 10 commandments that he wrote on the tables of stone *Exodus 32:16 from the book of the law written written by Moses and providing instruction that they were to be placed separately in the Ark (house) of the covenant. God's 10 commandments written on the tables of stone were placed inside the Ark of the covenant *Exodus 32:16 while the book of the law was placed in the side of the Ark of the covenant *Deuteronomy 31:26.

God's 10 commandments are eternal written on stone while the Mosiac laws for remission of sin are shadows of things to come pointing to JESUS and God's plan of salvation for mankind revealed in the new covenant to be written on the heart to love *Hebrews 8:10-12 from Jeremiah 31:31-38. The book of the law holds the shadow laws of animal sacrifices, circumcision, the feast day, the laws of the Priesthood and Sanctuary service which were all shadows of things to come pointing to JESUS and God's plan of salvation in the new covenant promise (Hebrews 7; Hebrews 8; Hebrews 9 and Hebrews 10).

As shown through the scriptures these are God's Words not mine and we are only just starting. Unlike the "shadow laws" from the Mosaic book of the law of the old covenant that are fulfilled in the new covenant, God's 10 commandments are eternal laws and repeated in the new covenant and are a part of the new covenant (scripture support here and here linked).

According to God's Word not mine, God's law has the same role they always have and that is to give us the knowledge of what sin is when broken *Romans 3:20; Romans 7:7; 1 John 3:4 and if we knowingly break anyone of them when God has given us a knowledge of the truth of his Word and we reject it we stand guilty before God of sin *James 2:10-11.

According to the scriptures all those who continue to practice known unrepentant sin when they have been given a knowledge of the truth of God's Word, reject the gift of Gods dear son and count the blood of the covenant an unholy thing doing despite to the Spirit of God's grace *Romans 6:23 and unless they turn back to believe and follow God's Word there is no more sacrifice for sin but a fearful looking forward to of the judgement to come (see Hebrews 10:26-31). The scripture provided here as shown above dear friend are my undisputed reliable source and they are God's Word (not mine) and it seems they disagree with you.

2) Verse 5 clearly states: But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees who believed, saying, It is needful to circumcise them, AND to command them to keep the law of Moses.

There is an AND my friend. The initial trigger of the whole discussion was circumcision, I agree, but then the whole discussion expanded into the whole Mosaic Law (which again, is synonymous with Torah, which includes the 10 commandments, please see the source). That happens in conversations and discussions all the time. You being discussing topic X, but as you continue the discussion ends up addressing topics A, B, C, D, etc. The whole assembly ended up debating about whether the Gentiles should keep the the Law of Moses or not. Also check out this link for further support.

As shown from the scriptures above the Mosiac law is not a reference to the 10 commandments as the Mosiac law is not the same as God's law. The book of the law in context to ACTS 15 is in reference to the shadow laws of the old covenant that are fulfilled in the new covenant. As shown through the scriptures already Gods 10 commandments are repeated and are a part of the new covenant scriptures. The question and context and question being answered in ACTS 15 was "Is circumcision a requirement for the salvation of gentile believers" (Mosiac shadow law) Acts of the Apostles 15:1-2. This is the context your disregarding. Acts 15 is not even talking about or is it remotely considering God's 10 commandments not being a requirement and standard for Christian living. One has to read that into the passage and ignore the context just provided and pretty much the read of the new testament scriptures that contradict that interpretation (scripture support here and here linked).

3) If the previous point by itself is not enough (though it is), in verses 6 to 11 we read:6 The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 7 After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: “Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8 God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9 He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10 Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear? 11 No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”

As shown through the scriptures above the previous point was not enough and neither is this.

If the "much discussion" was only about circumcision (which only takes a few minutes to perform), how come that Peter considers it "a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear"? Circumcision is a trivial thing, it only takes a few minutes and then you can forget about it for the rest of your life. How come Peter considers it unbearable yoke? Because they were talking about the whole Law of Moses, as verse 5 already made it explicit (duh).

Hmm nope. You prove to me Acts 15 is talking about the whole law inclusive of God's 10 commandments. Your reading into the scriptures what the scriptures do not say or do not teach. The context as provided earlier was to the question being asked "Is circumcision are requirement for salvation" Acts of the Apostles 15:1-2. This is the context of Acts 15 and what is being addressed throughout the chapter. There is no reference to God's 10 commandments throughout Acts 15 at all. Your trying to read into the scriptures what is not there. Interpreting Acts 15 as being God's 10 commandments are abolished and going against the teaching of JESUS in Matthew 5:17-20 and pretty much all of the writings of JESUS and the Apostles here and here linked.

1 Corinthians 7:17-24 17
The context clearly shows that Paul is talking about the personal calling of each individual, and therefore the individual commandments that each individual receives (as it should be by someone who is constantly receiving instructions from God in their individual calling by the Holy Spirit indwelling them). The context never mentions the 10 commandments, let alone the Sabbath.

Actually no. Paul in 1 Corinthians 1:7 is showing the outcome of the Jerusalem decision and that is "circumcision" of the flesh is not a requirement for salvation but the keeping of the commandments of God. Paul is stating the outcome of the decision of the Jerusalem council in ACTS 15 which is that circumcision is nothing but the keeping of the commandments of God *1 Corinthians 7:19. Paul also goes on to express a similar thought here when he says in Romans 2:28-29 [28], For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:[29], But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. Paul expresses the same thoughts to the Galatians in Galatian 5:6 [6] For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision avails any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which works by love or further on... Galatians 6:15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature or in Philippians 3:3 For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh. Since we were talking earlier about Colossians 2 let's also link this back to there.. Colossians 2:11 In whom also you are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ and further on...Colossians 3:11 Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all. - "Circumcision" is a "shadow law" from the Mosaic book of the law of Moses not God's 10 commandments which gives us the knowledge of what sin is when broken *Romans 3:20; Romans 7:7.

.................

SUMMARY: So in summary you have not provided anything in your post that either addresses the content provided in my earlier post or have you provided anything in this post that support your position that God's 10 commandments are abolished when talking about Acts 15 yet it is the scriptures alone the prove this teaching not to be not biblical. My prayer is that you may receive God's Word and be blessed.

Hope this is helpful.

 

[TruthSeek3r]

@LoveGodsWord I don't have time to post an elaborate answer to post #19 right now (life getting in the way), but in the meantime I challenge you (once again) to post an answer, but this time to a different question: Are Christians being licensed not to keep the Sabbath according to Colossians 2:16-17, Romans 14:5-8 and Acts 15?. Just set up an account on Biblical Hermeneutics StackExchange (it will take just a few seconds) and post an answer there.

I hope to be back to you and post a proper answer to post #19 as is due in a few days.

Looking forward to your answer on Biblical Hermeneutics StackExchange.