I never said I could not sort through these points.
You said what you said.
I think you need to be careful adding to what people are saying and perhaps even worse, doing the same to the Scriptures, since I never see you actually post Scriptures. I have learned its hard to reason when one uses their words as if its equal to God’s Word.
What a stretch! You said,
"I see a lot of opinions here, too much to even try to sort through and saying things I never said or even indicated." And now you try to condemn me for inferring from this that you didn't want to "sort through these points?" Even worse, from this you deduce that I read things into the Scriptures? Baloney.
I have sorted through these points too many times to count, but I’ll post it here for people who want to look a little deeper at what Paul is saying.
Oh, I've already dealt with you before, and others like you. The Scriptures say that we are not under the Old Covenant, the Law of Moses. However, that Law does inform us about what Christ would look like using "shadows."
We don't follow shadows--we only follow Christ. Paul condemned those who would put us back under the Law. Those who simply wanted to observe Jewish festivals because they were Jews Paul allowed to happen, because they were cultural and not a matter of law.
So let’s bring more context into
Col 2:16-17. There are more than one sabbath in the Scripture. Paul was told to spread the gospel, not change God's commandments written by God Himself, that God promised He would not alter.
Where is this in the passage, that Paul was not told to "change God's commandments" in the Law? It seems like you're making things up, rather than proving things from Scriptures as you claimed you would?
Psa 89:34 Mat 5:18 If we look at the context closely its obvious Paul is not contradicting Jesus who is God on His holy Sabbath- God's own Testimony, that is in heaven
Exo 15:5 Rev 11:19 where His word is settled
Psa 119:89.
None of these passages prove your point, that Paul upheld Sabbath observance. Reciting OT passages or reciting the Gospels where Jesus is still under the Law does not prove anything with respect to New Covenant law!
God blessed, man cannot take away God's blessing or sanctification. Almost all Scripture on the Sabbath has a thus saith the Lord- God blessed, man cannot reverse
Num 23:20
God's blessing upon Israel does not prove anything with respect to New Covenant law! Where is the fulfillment of your promise to prove from the Scriptures that Sabbath observance is still being required?
Quite the opposite, you referred to Colossians 2 where Paul said the exact opposite, that we are not under Sabbath observance. You just declare, without evidence, that there is more than one set of Sabbath requirements that Paul is talking about. Or, perhaps you are recognizing that there are different elements to the entire set of Sabbath requirements? Regardless, Paul in Col 2 rejected the entire set of Sabbath requirements.
and Paul's writings came with a significant warning
2 Peter 3:16 so we must be very careful with his writings and compare it to other Scriptures, such a Jesus own testimony saying His Sabbath would not end at the Cross but His faithful would be keeping 40 years after
Mat 24:20 and also for eternity
Isa 66:23
There is zero proof of what you promised to prove from Scriptures here.
Col 2:14 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;
So these are things that are against man. Is the Sabbath that is holy, sanctified and blessed by God against man?
You are trying to use proof texts that are against your position to prove your position! What audatious means you use, to use texts that state the opposite of what you claim.
Lets look at what Jesus said:
Mat 2:28 The Sabbath
was made for man
The Sabbath was made
for man, what God makes for man is not against us. The Sabbath is blessed and sanctified by God, its not the definition of contrary and against.
The fact Sabbath was made for man does not contradict the fact it was given to Israel *before the cross.*
So looking at the immediate context shows clearly Paul is not speaking of the Sabbath commandment.
Nothing in the immediate contet shows Paul speaking of anything other than the Sabbath commandment,
Nor does Paul have the authority to change God's written and spoken Testimony
Exo 31:18 the words of the covenant
Exo 34:28 that God promised He would not alter
Psa 89:34 they went from written on tables of stone to written on tablets of the heart
2 Cor 3:3 Heb 8:10 because God keeps His promises.
You are using OT citations under the Law and NT promises to prove Sabbath law is still in effect? That does not follow--non sequitur. The OT is the OT, and NT promises are NT promises. None of this means Sabbath observance is still in effect in the NT era.
The Greek word for sabbath here is plural not singular. So its not speaking of "The" Sabbath day "The holy day of the Lord" as already seen in the context.
Well, the Sabbath laws were varied, but they would all come under the heading of "Sabbath requirements."
The fact that laws were kept in the ark has no bearing at all. The ark was part of the temple, which was destroyed and was part of the Law.
Jesus is the new and eternal temple. His obedience is within him, and in nobody else except by extension of grace.
Paul is quoting Ezekiel all of the sacrifices and offerings.
Eze 45:17 And it shall be the prince's part to give
burnt offerings, and
meat offerings, and
drink offerings, in the feasts, and
in the new moons, and
in the 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.
Where did Paul quote Ezekiel? There is no mention of Ezekiel in Paul's statement in Col 2.
What was predicted would end when Jesus came?
Dan 9:27 Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week
He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate."
So this is not about any of the Ten Commandments but about the food and drink offerings, feast days that some were also annual sabbath(s) that were handwritten by Moses placed besides the ark of the covenant that came after the fall of man. The Sabbath started at Creation before sin
Exo 20:11 so can't be a "shadow" of anything as it is part of God's perfect plan before sin took over and a need for a plan of salvation.
This is a different argument. It seems you're admitting that the sacrifices and offerings came to an end at Christ's crucifixion. That's when *all* of the requirements of the Law were nailed to the crosss.
But now you're arguing for God's rest after creation. That is not what Paul was talking about. He was talking about Sabbath Law under the Law of Moses. Not the same thing.
Israel was given the Sabbath Law as an acknowledgement of God as Creator who rested on the 7th day. But that was God's Sabbath--not Israel's Sabbath. Israel had their own Sabbath to show their recognition of God's Sabbath.
There is so much more evidence I could provide like comparing what Jesus said which in using
Col 2:14-16 against the Sabbath commandment contradicts His teachings.
You haven't provided any evidence at all that Paul rejected Sabbath observance as under the Law of Moses. Nothing is more clear in Paul's writings than he was opposed to anybody who tried to reimpose the requirements of the Law upon anybody.
And if in your attempt to reinstate Sabbath Law you're trying to reestablish the authority of the Law of Moses Paul would condemn you. You'll never find your obedience accepted if it is not under authority of Christ. And Christ's forgiveness is free, and not under the Law of Moses.
If you want to observe Sabbath Day as a custom feel free. But you're not free to require any aspect of the Law of Moses. It is passe.
