Bible Question:
Greetings Yoshua! You said in your post that there was no verse in the Bible that validates Sunday as the Day of the Lord, but there is a verse in the Bible that invalidates Sabbath keeping - Col. 2:16. Col. 2:13-17 says, "When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14 having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross. 15 And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross. 16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ." The clear teaching of this passage is that the Law is fulfilled in Christ (Rom. 8:2) and no longer has authority over Christians (Gal. 3:25 and Heb. 7:12). As such, we can no longer be judged about Sabbath keeping. From past experience, I know that you will probably reply that the Sabbath in Col. 2:16 is plural and therefore does not apply to the weekly Sabbath. However, there are two reasons why this argument will not work: 1) The Greek word for Sabbath ('Sabbaton') is used interchangebly in both the singular and the plural. The word is used 68 times in the New Testament, and only once does it refer to more than one Sabbath (Acts 17:2). There we know it refers to more than one Sabbath because there is a numeral in the text telling us that it does. There are even several verses where the plural Sabbath is used with the singular day (Luke 4:16, Acts 13:14, and 16:13) This is conclusive proof that the Sabbath referred to in Col. 2:16 is the weekly Sabbath. 2) The second proof that the weekly Sabbath is referred to in Col. 2:16 is the fact that this list is taken from Num. 28 and 29. In these two chapters, we find the exact same issues dealt with as Paul deals with in Col. 2 - Yearly festivals, monthly feasts, and weekly Sabbaths. So, here we have one clear Bible passage that specifically says that we can no longer be judged based upon Sabbath keeping. It doesn't say that someone can't worship on the Sabbath if they choose to do so. It just says that no one can be judged for not doing it. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
Bible Answer: Excellent post Tim! Here's a little to "back you up".. :) "Or in respect of a holy day—Margin, part. The meaning is, “in the part, or the particular of a holy day; that is, in respect to it” The word rendered “holy-day”— —means properly a “feast” or “festival;” and the allusion here is to the festivals of the Jews. The sense is, that no one had a right to impose their observance on Christians, or to condemn them if they did not keep them. They had been delivered from that obligation by the death of Christ; Col. 2:14." (...) "Or of the new moon—On the appearance of the new moon, among the Hebrews, in addition to the daily sacrifices, two bullocks, a ram, and seven sheep, with a meat offering, were required to be presented to God; Num. 10:10; 28:11-14. The new moon in the beginning of the month Tisri (October) was the beginning of their civil year, and was commanded to be observed as a festival; Lev. 23:24, 25. Or of the Sabbath days—Greek, “of the Sabbaths.” The word Sabbath in the Old Testament is applied not only to the seventh day, but to all the days of holy rest that were observed by the Hebrews, and particularly to the beginning and close of their great festivals. There is, doubtless, reference to those days in this place, since the word is used in the plural number, and the apostle does not refer particularly to the Sabbath properly so called. There is no evidence from this passage that he would teach that there was no obligation to observe any holy time, for there is not the slightest reason to believe that he meant to teach that one of the ten commandments had ceased to be binding on mankind. If he had used the word in the singular number—“THE Sabbath,” it would then, of course, have been clear that he meant to teach that that commandment had ceased to be binding, and that a Sabbath was no longer to be observed. But the use of the term in the plural number, and the connection, show that he had his eye on the great number of days which were observed by the Hebrews as festivals, as a part of their ceremonial and typical law, and not to the moral law, or the Ten Commandments. No part of the moral law—no one of the ten commandments could be spoken of as “a shadow of good things to come.” These commandments are, from the nature of moral law, of perpetual and universal obligation." Taken from Barnes' Notes on the NT - Nolan |