Subject: Col. 2:16 and Sabbath Keeping |
Bible Note: I understand the Dallas Theological Seminary view, as wrong as it is on this point. This quote doesn't seem to be in line with what you pasted earlier from Barnes. So, according to the DTS authors of the Bible Knowledge Commentary, we are down to 9 commandments, only those specifically re-stated in the New Testament (another proposition I disagree with, since Christ was a Sabbath advocate, although not in the legalistic sense that the Pharisees were). Why aren't these other nine part of the "shadow of things to come"? Why can I disregard a Sabbath rest, but not consider that pesky anti-murder law to be a thing of the past as well? After all, there is no distinction between ceremonial and moral law, is there? I know you are only quoting someone else here, Nolan, but I do agree with Barnes' view a lot more than those who insist that something must be repeated in Paul's epistles to carry any weight for the believer. After all, is ALL Scripture profitable or not (2 Timothy 3:16)? --Joe! |