4,000 Years of Christmas

That is quite an amusing attempt to get out of what the verse says. I'm trying to show you that you are "reading" what you think it says into what it actually says. You are reading with a preconceived idea. You jump to vs 18 and ignore what 14-17 actually say In verse 14, Paul states that 'ordinances' were blotted out. Those ordinances were the rituals of the Jewish Law (Acts.6:14, Eph.2:15). I agree with you that these "ordinances" could very well have been rituals of Jewish law. Let's look at verse 14:

Well, we are off to a good start.

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; Here's what you're doing. You're reading the word translated "ordinances" and then jumping to the conclusion that these "ordinances" are God's commands and that they have been "done away with" by having them nailed to the cross. You[re further hindered in the fact that you won't consider ANY other translation other than the King James, the one you've locked yourself into. But I'm going to once again try.

First, you have to prove the King James is incorrect.

I'm going to look at two words. Let's start with "ordinances". ORDINANCES This is the greek word "dogma": from G1380; an opinion, (a public) decree: - decree (1), decrees (3), ordinances (1). In scripture "dogma" isn't used very much. But every time it does, it refers to manmade decrees, not decrees directly from God: Act 17:7 Whom Jason hath received: and these all do contrary to the decrees (dogma) of Caesar, saying that there is another king, one Jesus. Luk 2:1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree (dogma) from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. Sometimes men who worship God make "dogma", as evidenced by the council of Jerusalems decision about the gentiles in Acts 15: Act 16:4 And as they went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees (dogma) for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem. Eph 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances (dogma); for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; In Ephesians, "dogma" refers to the added in laws of the Jewish religion. ADDED. They weren't original commands of God, but LAWS of the jewish religion. Traditions. Dogma of their faith. But let's actually look at the word "ordinances" as used in other places in the King James because this is why you're getting confused and being led astray. Luk 1:6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances (dikaioma)of the Lord blameless. Note that this is NOT "dogma". It's a different greek word, "dikaioma". DIKAIOMA dik-ah'-yo-mah From G1344; an equitable deed; by implication a statute or decision: - judgment, justification, ordinance, righteousness. Let's look at another: Rom 13:2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance (diatage) of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. Note once again that it's an entirely different greek word, which by definition conveys an entirely different concept. I won't both with definitions from here on out, I'll assume that you have access to a greek lexicon. 1Co 11:2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances (paradosis), as I delivered them to you. Yet one more: 1Pe 2:13 Submit yourselves to every ordinance (ktsis) of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; So in the King James, the word "ordinance" is substituted for at least 5 DIFFERENT greek words. But clearly here it must mean something a man made decree, considering that the rest of the chapter dwells upon this in some detail. Col 2:20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances (dogmatizo), Col 2:21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not; Col 2:22 Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men? Note that this "dogmatizo" (obligated to following dogma) is again translated "ordinance". And it's MANMADE. As I said, this is why you don't "get it". You're locked into YOUR English understanding of the word "ordinance". You've made the assumption, with NO biblical basis, that "ordinance" is a commandment of God.

But we KNOW that Paul believed in the Lord's Holy Days and God's laws.

There you go!

You accuse me of assuming something and it is you are 'begging the question'.

I wanted to see how long it would take you before you tried to sneak in your unproven assumptions.

Nowhere in scripture does it say that Paul believed in Holy Days and God's Laws (Jewish).

Act 24:14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:

Yes, that had to do with the fact that Christ was the Messiah, not keeping Jewish days.

Note that he was clear. He believed ALL that was in the law and prophets. He did NOT believe ALL that was in the body of Jewish Law. They were, and are, two separate things.

Yes, he believed everything that proved that Jesus Christ was the Messiah,

(Acts 26:23) 22 Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come: 23 That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.

But that's only part of your problem in trying to translate Colossians 2:14. Let's turn to the second word. HANDWRITING As in "handwriting of ordinances". This is going to be a little shorter because the greek word translated "handwriting" (in the King James) only occurs here in scripture. It is: cheirographon Thayer Definition: 1) a handwriting, what one has written by his own hand 2) a note of hand or writing in which one acknowledges that money has either been deposited with him or lent to him by another, to be returned at the appointed time The second is the definition that is pertinent. It's basically an IOU. There are other definitions of "writing" in the new testament and most often the greek word employed is "graphos". So if the verse had meant merely "writing" this is the word that would have been employed. So it's an "iou" a debt. So what is this "debt", this "iou", this "handwriting" that is against us? Most likely, as you said, it's JEWISH ritual, coupled with an ascetic gnostic viewpoint. The Jews HAD added a variety, a plethora, a whole body of manmade law to scripture. They used this AGAINST gentiles, to separate them from God. Christ took this dogma and nailed it to the cross. He cancelled out the debt. He got rid of the "iou".

Christ got rid of all of the Law,

Shall we look at Gal.3:10- 10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. Deut 27:26 James 2:10 11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. Hab 2:4 Rom 1:17 12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. Lev 18:5 Rom 10:5 13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: Deut 21:23

The Greek word for 'law' in Gal. 3:10-13 is the same that Christ uses in Matthew 5:17-18.

The Greek word (nomus) refers to the Jewish Mosaic laws.

Now, all the running to the "Greek' proved nothing.

The word has a context in English that defines it.

What was wiped out was the debt that we owed the Law, 'the wages of sin is death'.

Christ paid the debt that we owed and that the Law demanded.

Look, I don't mean to be so harsh about this, but many people don't interpret Paul's writing correctly and always have: 2Pe 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 2Pe 3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction. 2Pe 3:17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own steadfastness.

Oh, yes, and it was Peter who himself lapsed into returning to Jewish 'habits' (Gal.2) and was rebuked by Paul.

Paul was the one to whom was revealed the mystery of the Church,(Eph.3) that we are not under the law but grace.(Gal.3)

Peter KNEW that Paul's writings were hard for people to understand. But we would do well to heed his advice.

Yes, because people want to reject what Paul wrote about Grace and mix grace with the law, despite what scripture says on the matter.

6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. (2Cor.3:6)

The reason that people do not want to stick with the King James is because it will not allow them to throw up smoke with appeals to the original or other translations.

You showed me a number of different meanings for Ordiance and than had to admit that it could mean exactly what I said it did, Jewish laws.

And Col2:16 is saying that we are not under any obligation to follow Jewish laws, e.g. sabbaths.

You can't show me anyone in the New Testament after Acts 2 that was keeping the Jewish Sabbath. Act 13:44 And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God. Act 17:2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the Scriptures, Act 18:4 And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.

Those were unsaved Jews that Paul was trying to reach with the Gospel (Rom.1:16)

There is neither Jew nor Greek now there will be. That's not what Paul wrote. Perhaps you missed it last time Rom 10:12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

Yes, that is that they can both now equally receive the Gospel.

Before the Church age, salvation was of the Jew (Jn.4:22)

Now, when one believes, Jew or Gentile, he becomes a new creature in Christ, a Christian (2Cor.5)

As I said, the day is unimportant, sabbath observance is not for the Church, it is for the Jew and has ceased with the removal of their nation, but will return later when they are reestablished (Col.2:16-17) Collosians 2:16-17 says no such thing. You know it and it has been explained to you many times.

Oh, there have been attempts to explain it away!

The verse is very clear-the Christian is not under any obligation to follow any Jewish day or any special day for that matter (Rom.14:5)

Here is another angle that perhaps youhave not considered. What are the Pharisees doing here? Mat 12:10 And a man was there whose hand was withered. And they questioned Jesus, asking, "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath?"--so that they might accuse Him.

Yes, before laws Christ paid for the sins of the world, those laws were in effect, not after (Col.2:14)

They were applying the standard for false prophets set out in Deuteronomy 13:1-5. They wanted Jesus to break the Sabbath so they could kill him and get back to oppresing the faithful. They didn't kill Jesus because He didn't break the Sabbath - he explained the Sabbath.

Yes, the sabbath was legimate before Christ died and was resurrected and became the end of the Law (Gal.3)

Many, many people think Jesus died, then was resurrected, and then, voila'!, everyone is Christian! This is absolutely not the case, and we all know it. Christians were the overwhelming minority while Paul lived. Had Paul ever preached the end of the Sabbath or the Law, he would have been executed on the spot using the same standard.

Paul preached grace wherever he went.

That same grace that the Counsel of Acts held to in Acts 15.

It was the school of the circumsion (Jews)who followed behind Paul and tried to get saved people back into Jewish rules and laws.

Today there is neither Jew nor Gentile once they are saved. Again, that is not what the Bible says. It puts no adjectives or qualifications or anything in the verses that state this. In fact, Paul writes that the same Lord is Lord of them all!

That is exactly what the Bible says, a saved person today (Jew or Gentile) becomes a Christian (1Cor.10:32)

After the Rapture of the church (1Thess.4:16-18), that will no longer be the case.

You know, you have adopted a debate style that is prominent on the left. You keep saying the same incorrect stuff over and over. Well, W didn't lie about WMD, Al Gore did not invent the internet, and there is no difference between the Jew or the Greek. You can repeat yourself another 100 times, it simply is not so.

I have given you scriptures that say very clearly what I am saying.

You have to run to the Greek in order to 'wrest' those scriptures.

Rom.14:5 and Col.2:16 are very clear to anyone who wants to read them.

Mark 16:1-2 is very clear.

What you want to do is find verses to match your theology and reject those which don't.

That is not an English dictionary now is it? You're being "dynamic" again.

Dynamic is a legimate translation techinque, I am sorry you don't have any understanding of it.

I have proven that the Jew is a Jew and a Gentile is a Gentile-racially. How, I must have missed it?

You missed Rom.11:1-Paul refers to himself being an Isralite.

You missed Acts 10:28, where Peter calls himself a Jew?

And that it is unlawful for a gentile to have any dealings with a Jew, but that God gave Peter a new revelation that Jews and Gentiles can now fellowship.

Peter forgot this in Gal.2 and was rebuked by Paul, because Peter started thinking like a racial Jew again.

No, you quote verses that drop context and have nothing to do with the Jewish age that will come again. I keep searching my Bible for a "Jewish age" and coming up blank. What I do come up with is a whole lot of scriptures that indicate there is no more Jew or Greek, and that the priests of God will come out of all nations in the millenia. Where do you come up with this stuff?

Do you find anyone in the Old Testament called the Church-one body

That was only revealed to Paul (Eph.3) not to anyone in the Old Testament.

God says that the tribe of Levites will come from the nations to run the Millennial Kingdom.(Ezek 44).

No Gentiles will be priests in the Temple.

Try reading the Bible instead of cherry picking it.

I hope you are not counting on your Sabbath observance for getting you into heaven, because it won't. And my non-observance will not keep me out. The only issue today is the Lord Jesus Christ and His saving work on the Cross. You're half right. Works do not save men. Salvation is a gift and can't be earned. However, your theology is explicitly refuted time and again: Luk 12:47 "And that slave who knew his master's will and did not get ready or act in accord with his will, will receive many lashes, Luk 12:48 but the one who did not know it, and committed deeds worthy of a flogging, will receive but few. From everyone who has been given much, much will be required; and to whom they entrusted much, of him they will ask all the more. Mat 5:19 "Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. Mat 7:22 "Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' Mat 7:23 "And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.' Rom 6:1 What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin so that grace may increase? Rom 6:2 May it never be! How shall we who died to sin still live in it? 1Jo 3:4 Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.

1 O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?

2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

3 Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?

4 Have ye suffered so many things in vain? if it be yet in vain.

5 He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

6 Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. Gen 15:6 Rom 4:3 James 2:23

7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.

8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. Gen 12:3 Acts 3:25

9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.

10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. Deut 27:26 James 2:10

11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. Hab 2:4 Rom 1:17

12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. Lev 18:5 Rom 10:5

13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: Deut 21:23

You don't have to respond to this post if you don't want to. I am just responding to it because I do not want to leave it unanswered.

Do you see, or understand that there is a difference, between scriptural commandments of God and Jewish traditions and ordinances?

I think this may be the biggest stumbling block people have when receiving the good news for the first time. All their lives they have been programmed to think "Old Testament, Jewish"/"New Testament Christian". We all saw this on the thread earlier where people could not even differentiate the difference of Israel and Judah.

Unfortunately, this simple truth does not register with most folks and I really believe it stems from an inborn anti semitic feeling coming from "They Crucified Our Lord" syndrome.

Paul was a life long Jew! [Philippians 3:5; Acts 23:6; Romans 11:1] Paul continued to be a Jew....even after he came to the faith of Jesus! [Acts 9:18; Acts 9:20 and 13:5, 13:14, 13:44, 14:1, 17:1-2, 17:10, 17:17, 18:4, 18:19, 19:8. Paul identified himself as a Jew! [Galatians 2:15] He considered other Jewish believers still to be Jews! [Galatians 2:13, 2:14] Paul continued to live as a Pharisee! [Acts 21:24][1 Corinthians 7:19] Paul did not teach the other Jews to abandon their beliefs! [Acts 21:20-24] Paul continued to observe the Sabbath! [Acts 16:13, 17:2] He also kept the Festivals [Acts 20:6, 20:16] and taught others they should honor the Festivals also! [1 Corinthians 5:8]

Others recognized Paul's Jewishness [Acts 16:20-21] as well as that of his friend's [Acts 19:34]. He called the people of Israel his race [Romans 9:3-4] and his companions were all Jewish! [Acts 4:36, 15:22, 16:1, 18:2-3, 18:24, 22:12].

Paul spoke and taught from Hebrew scripture! [Acts 13:22, 13:33, 13:34, 13:35, 13:41, 13:47, 21:40, 22:2, 26:14, 28:26-27][Romans 2:6, 2:24, 3:4] He taught that the Torah is Holy [Romans 7:12] and good [1 Timothy 1:18]. He believed everything in the Torah [Acts 24:14, 26:22] and went to Jerusalem in obedience to the Torah [Acts 15:2].

He worshiped as his forefathers did [2 Timothy 1:3] at the temple [Acts 21:26, 22:17, 24:17-18]. He assured Jewish elders he had never done anything against the Law (Torah) [Acts 28:17]

A vital thing to remember in our studies is that Our Lord was rejected by the Sanhedrin for their own personal, political reasons....not by the Jews in general. For every Jew that wanted him crucified there were hundreds who were horrified at what their leaders were doing. Jesus came to be sacrificed.....during Passover.....as the Lamb of God. Only under the auspices of the Jews could this have taken place...and only at Passover.

Paul speaks of the blotting out of the handwriting of ordinances [Colossians 2:14] and the law of commandments in the ordinances [Ephesians 2:15. The Greek word, covered earlier on the thread, "Dogma", means ordinance and is man made...not divine law. [Mark 7:6-9] Dogma became a middle wall between Jews and Gentiles [Ephesians 2:14

Through the sacrifice of Our Lord He abolished this need for "Ordinance" [Galatians 3:26-29] through his perfect, "God's" law [James 1:25]. Our Lord, Himself tells us [Matthew 5:17-18] He is here not to destroy, but fulfill. Christ did away with the "Ordinances" of men. He did not do away with His law which the Apostle Paul call Holy [Romans 7:12].

[Deuteronomy 4:40] God's Law is for our benefit.

Can you provide me with the algabraic correction factor you use to interpret the scriptures? Your posts are rife with inserted adjectives and qualifiers. I am worn out. Here's my last shot: 13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: Deut 21:23 In this case, there actually is a qualifying prepositional phrase that you have omitted. Christ has omitted us FROM THE CURSE OF THE LAW, Christ has not removed the Law (10 Commandments) from anyone. If anything, He has broadened the invitation. We are all guilty of sin and none of us are righteous. This is not a license to sin. Omission of a verse in some partition of the Bible does not repeal the 4th Commandment. Hopefully you will divorce yourself from your preconcieved notions and let the plain scriptures speak to you.

Stop trying to avoid what the scriptures say about the Law

The Law was to bring us to the knowledge of sin, not that we are to live by it.

Romans 7:

[12] Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good. [13] Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful. [[25] I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

We do not live according to the Mosaic Law, we live according to the Law of Christ, which is by faith.

Law (of Christ), Summary: The new "law of Christ" is the divine love, as wrought into the renewed heart by the Holy Spirit Romans 5:5; Hebrews 10:16 and outflowing in the energy of the Spirit, unforced and spontaneous, toward the objects of the divine love ; 2 Corinthians 5:14-20; 1 Thessalonians 2:7,8. It is, therefore, " the law of liberty" ; James 1:25; 2:12 in contrast with the external law of Moses. Moses' law demands love, ; Leviticus 19:18; Deuteronomy 6:5; Luke 10:27 Christ's law is love ; Romans 5:5; 1 John 4:7,19,20 and so takes the place of the external law by fulfilling it ; Romans 13:10; Galatians 5:14 http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/ScofieldReferenceNotes/srn.cgi?book=2jo&chapter=001

Mar 7:7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Jewish laws that are not scriptural were NEVER legitimate. They often WERE commandments of men.

You admit that the sacrifices have been removed because of the finished work on the Cross.

Sacrifice has not been "removed". It's still a completely legitimate doctrine. However, scripture undeniably SHOWS that animal sacrifice is not needed under the new covenant. It's clearly spelled out in Hebrews:

Heb 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
Heb 10:11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of God;

Well, all of the Jewish laws given by Moses are also removed.

And there you go. The holy days were NOT "Jewish" laws. They ARE the holy days of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Lev 23:2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, Concerning the feasts of the LORD, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, even these are my feasts.

And unlike sacrifices, there is no scripture that says that since Christ died, we don't have to observe his feast days. And you can't produce one that does.

The Christian now 'keeps the Law', not by following the Old Testament laws, but by walking in the Spirit (Rom.6, Gal.3, Col,3)

The spirit is God's holy spirit. The spirit of Christ. There is no way that God's spirit would ever lead one to violate one of God's laws or commandments. The purpose of God's spirit is to conform you to God's laws:

1Jo 2:3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
1Jo 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
1Jo 2:5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.
1Jo 2:6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

If you find yourself violating one of God's commandments, such as the sabbath commandment, then you are NOT following God's spirit because God would not lead you into sin.

The Sabbaths were a sign to the Jew and no Christian is required to keep them, either Sat. or Sunday.

That is a philosophy of man. It appears nowhere in scripture.

One more time. Let me ask a basic question: Do you see, or understand that there is a difference, between scriptural commandments of God and Jewish traditions and ordinances? Do you recognize the fact that Jews have built up a vast body of laws, ordinances and customs that are not necessarily scriptural in nature? Yes, and those were not legimate when the Lord was on Earth. He ignored them (Mk.7:7). Mar 7:7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. Jewish laws that are not scriptural were NEVER legitimate. They often WERE commandments of men.

Correct, but those Jewish laws that were legitimate Christ did fulfill and since He did, we are not under obligation to do so (Acts 15)

You admit that the sacrifices have been removed because of the finished work on the Cross. Sacrifice has not been "removed". It's still a completely legitimate doctrine. However, scripture undeniably SHOWS that animal sacrifice is not needed under the new covenant. It's clearly spelled out in Hebrews:

There is no more sacrifice for sins (Heb.10:26), Christ completed all the sacrifice necessary with His own Blood.

Heb 10:10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Heb 10:11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of God;

Yes, that means there is no more sacrifices for sin.

Well, all of the Jewish laws given by Moses are also removed. And there you go. The holy days were NOT "Jewish" laws. They ARE the holy days of the Lord Jesus Christ. Lev 23:2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, Concerning the feasts of the LORD, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, even these are my feasts.

Those were Holy Days given to the nation of Israel.

Speak unto the children of Israel(Lev.23:2)

Only Israel was under obligation to obey them.

Now I will grant that there are non-scriptural traditions attached to the Jewish observance of the Lord's days, but the Jewish people do NOT recognize Jesus Christ as Lord so they don't observe them with the proper understanding. And unlike sacrifices, there is no scripture that says that since Christ died, we don't have to observe his feast days. And you can't produce one that does.

Ofcourse there is, Acts 15 where the requirements for a Gentile believer were explained and it did not include any Feast days or sabbath observance.

The Christian now 'keeps the Law', not by following the Old Testament laws, but by walking in the Spirit (Rom.6, Gal.3, Col,3) The spirit is God's holy spirit. The spirit of Christ. There is no way that God's spirit would ever lead one to violate one of God's laws or commandments. The purpose of God's spirit is to conform you to God's laws: 1Jo 2:3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. 1Jo 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. 1Jo 2:5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. 1Jo 2:6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

And those commandments do not include those given solely to the nation of Israel, such as the Feast days and Sabbaths.

If you find yourself violating one of God's commandments, such as the sabbath commandment, then you are NOT following God's spirit because God would not lead you into sin.

Not if sabbath observance isn't required in the New Testament and it isn't even mentioned as being so.

The Sabbaths were a sign to the Jew and no Christian is required to keep them, either Sat. or Sunday. That is a philosophy of man. It appears nowhere in scripture.

Read Ezek 20, and see that the Sabbaths were given to the Jews for a sign.

No one before Israel and after is required to keep the Sabbath as part of the moral law.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.