An additional point I'd like to make with regards to Colossians 2:16-17..this point involves considering three different Scriptures (not of necessity but for support):
Colossians 2:16-17 [SUP]
16 [/SUP]Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of
food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. [SUP]17 [/SUP]These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.
Hebrews 9:10-12 [SUP]
10 [/SUP]but deal only with
food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed
until the time of reformation. [SUP]
11 [/SUP]But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come,[SUP]
[a][/SUP] then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) [SUP]
12 [/SUP]he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption.
Galatians 3:16-25 [SUP]
16 [/SUP]Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one,
“And to your offspring,” who is Christ. [SUP]
17 [/SUP]This is what I mean: the law, which came 430 years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void. [SUP]
18 [/SUP]For if the inheritance comes by the law, it no longer comes by promise; but God gave it to Abraham by a promise. [SUP]
19 [/SUP]
Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions, until the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made, and it was put in place through angels by an intermediary. [SUP]
20 [/SUP]Now an intermediary implies more than one, but God is one. [SUP]
21 [/SUP]Is the law then contrary to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a law had been given that could give life, then righteousness would indeed be by the law. [SUP]
22 [/SUP]But the Scripture imprisoned everything under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. [SUP]
23 [/SUP]Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed.
[SUP]24 [/SUP]So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. [SUP]25 [/SUP]But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian,
Here is the reasoning:
1. Colossians 2:16-17 groups food and drink offerings, the Sabbath and annual festivals together.
2. Food and drink offerings were imposed until the time of Reformation..which was when Christ came and died for our sins
per Hebrews 9:10-12.
3. Galatians 3:16-25 provides further support that the Old Covenant was only in effect until Christ came and died for our
sins. It is no longer in effect.
4. Since Colossians 2:16-17 groups food and drink offerings, the Sabbath and annual festivals together, they are under the
same level of applicability to the New Covenant believer.
5. Additionally, Hebrews 10:1-2 uses the same language of "shadows of things to come" in reference to animal sacrifices that
is applied to the Sabbath and Holy Days, placing them in this same category of inapplicable things.
As indicated on other posts, an additional point is that Hebrews 10:1-2 uses the same reference of "shadow of things to come" in reference to the animal sacrifices as Colossians 2:16-17 uses in regards to the Sabbath, Holy Days, food and drink offerings.
Hebrews 10:1-2 For since the law has but
a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near. [SUP]
2 [/SUP]Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sins?
The reasoning that the Sabbath and Holy Days do not apply to New Covenant Christians is inescapable. If someone wants to observe them, fine, but don't accuse other non-observant individuals of being false Christians or being in sin.
