New BARM is on Facebook/Twitter NOW!
Philippine Standard Time
Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Latest topics
» Kung pagbabatayan ang pagmumukha ni Soriano
Sun Jan 08, 2017 2:42 am by Teng

» Survivor...
Wed Aug 31, 2016 1:00 pm by Esther

» Guys musta na kayo?
Fri May 10, 2013 8:51 am by RavlaM

» iNTRODUCTION
Thu Jan 24, 2013 6:52 pm by Comb@tron

» Lets talk about MARRIAGE
Thu Jan 24, 2013 6:49 pm by Comb@tron

» Para sa Muslim, Masama bang maging Pedopilyo?
Tue Jun 19, 2012 4:13 am by viruzol_007

» DEBATE with VANNIE...
Tue Jun 19, 2012 3:26 am by harballah

» DEATH PENALTY
Fri Mar 16, 2012 11:01 pm by RavlaM

» Ang katotohanan tungkol sa Iglesia ni Cristo na pekeng iglesia na tatag ni Manalo.
Wed Feb 29, 2012 7:57 pm by Lito

» Watch Impeachment trial Live Streaming: CJ CORONA
Thu Jan 19, 2012 4:02 pm by Disciple

» Si kapatid na Felix Manalo
Tue Nov 22, 2011 12:28 pm by Guest

» Ashampoo Burning Studio v10.0.15 Portable
Fri Nov 18, 2011 4:19 pm by Dhugz

» Atomix Virtual DJ Pro v7.0.5 Portable
Fri Nov 18, 2011 4:11 pm by Dhugz

» Constitutional Crisis?
Wed Nov 16, 2011 9:54 pm by Guest

» HOTSPOTSHIELD
Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:54 am by Disciple

April 2018
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930     

Calendar Calendar

Social bookmarking

Social bookmarking delicious  Social bookmarking reddit  Social bookmarking stumbleupon  Social bookmarking slashdot  Social bookmarking yahoo  Social bookmarking google  Social bookmarking blogmarks  Social bookmarking live      

Bookmark and share the address of The New Public square on your social bookmarking website

Bookmark and share the address of The New Public Square Forum on your social bookmarking website

Who is online?
In total there are 5 users online :: 0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 5 Guests :: 1 Bot

None

[ View the whole list ]


Most users ever online was 470 on Tue May 29, 2012 4:40 pm
Poll
FORUM TRANSLATOR
Forum Protection
Advertisement
HOTSPOTSHIELD

 

Protecting the web for your                                                                                                                                                                              security, privacy and anonymity!                                                                                                                                                                        Get behind the SHIELD! 100% FREE!

 


Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Go down

Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by Hector on Fri Aug 06, 2010 11:20 am

Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day-(Colossians 2:16).

1. Brown: On Colossians 2:16, Here Paul argues that the Jewish law (the legal demands) were cancelled in the death of Christ (v. 14), and therefore the Jewish food regulations and religious calendar are not binding on the Christian. Included in this ritual was the Jewish sabbath observance. These observances, Paul claims, pointed to a spiritual reality fulfilled in Christ (NIDNTT 3:410, Sabbath).
2. EDNT: Questions concerning the Sabbath also play a role in the religious disputes in the church at Colossae (Col 2:16). Like festivals and new moons sabbath observance is only a shadow of what is to come (2:17; cf. the similar argument in Gal 4:9f) (EDNT 3:222, sabbaton).
3. Kittel: With liberation from bondage to the stoixeia tou kosmou the dogmata are also set aside so that the Christian community is definitely freed from the Sabbath commandment - no matter whether this is based on the supposed necessity of the Law to salvation or on the controlling power of cosmic forces (footnote #236). This footnote reads, Cf. R. 14:5f. The Roman church obviously included both Jewish Christians who clung to the Sabbath and Gentile Christians who did not keep it. Sabbath observance can be allowed by the apostle when it is not viewed as if obedience to the Law were necessary to salvation (TDNT 7:30, Sabbaton).

I would like for anyone to supply a lexicon (not your opinion or a citation from a commentary) that demonstrates Colossians 2:16 does not refer to the Sabbath.

Hector
.
.

Posts : 40
Join date : 2010-07-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by freespirit on Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:23 pm

Hector wrote:

I would like for anyone to supply a lexicon (not your opinion or a citation from a commentary) that demonstrates Colossians 2:16 does not refer to the Sabbath.

Yes, the verse certainly pertains sabbath day, but no one can conclude about the meaning of the verse without using contextual analization. The whole matter rests in this verses, saying...


And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
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;
Having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.
Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath:
Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body of Christ.


Obviously, the sabbath, the drinks, the meat, the new moon, spoken in this issue are all attributed to the hand written ordinances, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; . Clearly, the verses never speak about the Moral Law or the Ten Commandments, where the Seventh-day sabbath declared. Otherwise, it speak about the sabbath which the ordinances also contains.

The key to understanding Colossians 2:16 is found two verses earlier in Colossians 2:14. The key phrase is, “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances.” The Greek word for blotting is “exaleipho”, pronounced “ex-al-i'-fo”. Strong's dictionary gives the definition; “to smear out, that is, obliterate (erase tears, figuratively pardon sin): - blot out, wipe away.” The next keyword in this verse is “handwriting” and the Greek word is “cheirographon”, pronounced “khi-rog'-raf-on” and the definition is, “something handwritten (”chirograph”), that is, a manuscript (specifically a legal document or bond (figuratively)): - handwriting.” And the last and final very important word we need to look at is “ordinances”, Greek word is “dogma”, pronounced “dog'-mah” and the Strong's definition is “a law (civil, ceremonial or ecclesiastical): - decree, ordinance.”

What kind of law? Are all laws in the Bible pertains to the Ten Commandments? No. The Bible supplies two types of law, one written in a book by the finger of Moses, and the other written in the tables of stones. But in this verses, the issue was clear, that Paul speaks about the "handwritten ordinances" which Thayer defined as the rules and requirements of the law of Moses; carrying a suggestion of severity and of threatened judgment.

So what was nailed to the cross as Paul explains in verse 14? The “Law of Moses,” which is also called the “Mosaic Law”, the “Book of the Law” and as we have just seen by the definition given by the KJV Bible, the “Ordinances.” Yes, the ordinances also speak of sabbaths like the annual sabbath, the 8 sabbaths, the sabbath of the cultivated land, an so on...
avatar
freespirit
.
.

Posts : 44
Join date : 2010-07-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by Hector on Sun Aug 08, 2010 8:22 am

3 lexicons teach the Sabbath is no longer binding.

Hector
.
.

Posts : 40
Join date : 2010-07-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by freespirit on Mon Aug 09, 2010 12:13 pm

your lexicons explain the verse very out of context
avatar
freespirit
.
.

Posts : 44
Join date : 2010-07-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by Hector on Mon Aug 09, 2010 12:17 pm

Lexicons define words. You don't like the definitions so of course you reject them.

You used the word "explain" in your last post. Define it please with documentation because opinions are ok when it comes to choosing things like one's favorite ice-cream but when it comes to the Bible they won't do.

Hector
.
.

Posts : 40
Join date : 2010-07-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by freespirit on Mon Aug 09, 2010 8:24 pm

Where are the opinions in my first post? Point them...

Lexicons not just define words, personal opinions of the writers were also inserted.
avatar
freespirit
.
.

Posts : 44
Join date : 2010-07-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by Hector on Mon Aug 09, 2010 9:06 pm

Herte is the definition of a lexicon:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lexicon

No opinions there.

Hector
.
.

Posts : 40
Join date : 2010-07-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by freespirit on Mon Aug 09, 2010 11:44 pm

No opinions? Really?


3.
Kittel: With liberation from bondage to the stoixeia tou kosmou the
dogmata are also set aside so that the Christian community is definitely
freed from the Sabbath commandment - no matter whether this is based on
the supposed necessity of the Law to salvation or on the controlling
power of cosmic forces (footnote #236). This footnote reads, Cf. R.
14:5f. The Roman church obviously included both Jewish Christians who
clung to the Sabbath and Gentile Christians who did not keep it. Sabbath
observance can be allowed by the apostle when it is not viewed as if
obedience to the Law were necessary to salvation
(TDNT 7:30, Sabbaton).

Underlined parts which made the law lightly regarded in the subject of salvation are totally personal opinions of the writer.

Yes, there's sabbath mentioned in the Pauline texts but what kind of Sabbath is it? The Seventh day Sabbath recorded in the Decalogue? Obviously, that's a baseless opinion.
avatar
freespirit
.
.

Posts : 44
Join date : 2010-07-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by Hector on Tue Aug 10, 2010 4:12 am

Thanks for your opinion that what is written in this dictionary is an opinion.

Hector
.
.

Posts : 40
Join date : 2010-07-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by freespirit on Tue Aug 10, 2010 12:49 pm

The mere fact that you can't defend them is because they are just opinions of other person...not yours/
avatar
freespirit
.
.

Posts : 44
Join date : 2010-07-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by Hector on Tue Aug 10, 2010 1:48 pm

The mere fact that you can't cite any lexicon/dictionary to support your position reveals all you have is just your opinion.
---------------------------
You dodged this from one of my previous posts:

You used the word "explain" in your last post. Define it please with documentation because opinions are ok when it comes to choosing things like one's favorite ice-cream but when it comes to the Bible they won't do.

Hector
.
.

Posts : 40
Join date : 2010-07-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by freespirit on Tue Aug 10, 2010 2:42 pm

The mere fact that I'm not always basing from the lexicons is because some of the explanations are against the context of the subject and even contradict plenty of verses.
------------------------------

What do you want me to use aside of "explain"?
avatar
freespirit
.
.

Posts : 44
Join date : 2010-07-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by Hector on Tue Aug 10, 2010 3:11 pm

1. Thanks again for your opinion.
2. I want you to cite a source for the meaning of the word "explain". You used it so supply a source that defines it....no opinions please.

Hector
.
.

Posts : 40
Join date : 2010-07-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by freespirit on Wed Aug 11, 2010 12:03 am

explain: to give the reason for or cause of
avatar
freespirit
.
.

Posts : 44
Join date : 2010-07-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by Hector on Wed Aug 11, 2010 7:40 am

What is your source(s) for that reference?

Hector
.
.

Posts : 40
Join date : 2010-07-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by freespirit on Wed Aug 11, 2010 5:08 pm

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/explain
avatar
freespirit
.
.

Posts : 44
Join date : 2010-07-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by Hector on Wed Aug 11, 2010 7:39 pm

You won't accept the dictionaries I cited so I don't accept yours.

Hector
.
.

Posts : 40
Join date : 2010-07-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by freespirit on Thu Aug 12, 2010 4:25 pm

hahaha... ok.. its fine. Next time, if you don't want me to use dictionaries, don't use lexicons. I will not accept that.
avatar
freespirit
.
.

Posts : 44
Join date : 2010-07-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by Hector on Thu Aug 12, 2010 4:52 pm

You will use dictionaries but tell me not to use lexicons when lexicons are dictionaries.

Hector
.
.

Posts : 40
Join date : 2010-07-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by freespirit on Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:37 pm

lexicons include self explanation about the verse and not just the Greek or Hebrew translation of a certain word. While dictionary just define words.
avatar
freespirit
.
.

Posts : 44
Join date : 2010-07-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by Hector on Fri Aug 13, 2010 5:44 am

Not true. There are times when dictionaries do more than "just define words".

Hector
.
.

Posts : 40
Join date : 2010-07-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by Goodman on Wed Jul 20, 2011 3:30 pm

Kung naabolish na ba ang Sabbath, ibig bang sabihin nito wala na ito, as in extinct na? Kasi pag extinct na kahit na isang species nun wala ka ng makikita, di ba?

Kelan ito na-extinct?
avatar
Goodman
.
.

Posts : 8
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Colossians 2:16 - The Sabbath is no longer binding

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum