In their writings to the churches, the Apostles only mentioned the sabbath three times.
(1) The sabbath is a symbol of salvation rest in Christ (Hebrews 4).
So if I tell you don't let anyone judge you for taking communion on Sunday, would you read that as communion on Sunday is done away?
(2) The N.T. believer is not bound to keep the sabbath (Colossians 2:9-17).
What Was Nailed to the Cross?
Since all scripture is given by the inspiration of God so that Christians should be complete (2 Timothy 3:16-17), it is wise to look at more than one verse to determine what, for example, was nailed to the cross.
There is only one only scripture that uses the "nailed it to the cross" expression (AV/NKJ), it is Colossians 2:13-14, in which Paul states,
"And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross".
We will look at what it does and does not say.
First though, let's look at what the last chapter of the last book of the Bible teaches:
"Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city" (Revelation 22:14, NKJV throughout unless otherwise noted).
Since it is only "those who do His commandments...{who} have the right to enter...the city" (Revelation 22:14), the ten commandments could not be "contrary to us". Actually, it is only those who will not keep the ten commandments that are denied access. Revelation specifically shows that those who break one of at least four of the ten commandments will be outside God's city (Revelation 22:15).
So then, if the ten commandments were not "nailed to the cross," what was?
Look again at what the Bible actually says (two translations):
14 having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross (Colossians 2:14, NKJV)
14 having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.. (Colossians 2:14, NASB)
The
handwriting of requirements (often also called the
hand-writing of ordinances) or
certificate of debt was wiped away and nailed to the cross.
Which requirements were wiped out?
Please understand that the expression "the handwriting of requirements" (
cheirógrafon toís dógmasin) is a Greek legal expression that signifies
the penalty which a lawbreaker had to pay--it does not signify the laws that are to be obeyed--only the penalty. It is only through the acceptance of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ that the penalty was wiped out ("the handwriting of requirements"). But only the penalty, not the law!
Even some Protestant commentators realize this is so. Notice what
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible states about Colossians 2:14:
Whatever was in force against us is taken out of the way. He has obtained for us a legal discharge from the hand-writing of ordinances, which was against us (v. 14), which may be understood,
1. Of that obligation to punishment in which consists the guilt of sin. The curse of the law is the hand-writing against us, like the hand-writing on Belshazzar's wall. Cursed is every one who continues not in every thing. This was a hand-writing which was against us, and contrary to us; for it threatened our eternal ruin. This was removed when he redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us, Gal 3:13. (from Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Modern Edition, Electronic Database. Copyright (c) 1991 by Hendrickson Publishers, Inc.).
In addition, let us look at the Greek term
exaleipho translated as "wiped out" in Colossians 2:14:
NT:1813
exaleipho (ex-al-i'-fo); from NT:1537 and NT:218; to smear out, i.e. obliterate (erase tears, figuratively, pardon sin) (Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright (c) 1994, Biblesoft and International Bible Translators, Inc.)
In other words,
exaleipho has to do with wiping out sin. This is also confirmed in Acts 3:19 where Peter also uses the term
exaleipho, which is translated as "blotted out" below:
19 Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord.
Hence, it is
sin and the related penalties that are to be blotted or wiped out. And the penalties could vary from "being unclean to the evening" (Leviticus 11:24-28) to making an offering (Leviticus 5:5-6) to being "cut off from his people" (Leviticus 7:27) to the death penalty (Exodus 31:14).
This is also confirmed elsewhere in the New Testament:
13 Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (Galatians 3:13).
The curse of the law is related to the penalty. And Jesus paid it.
But what about the law of God? Was the law of God to be wiped out?
Remember that the Bible clearly teaches that sin is lawlessness:
Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness. And you know that He was manifested to take away our sins, and in Him there is no sin. (I John 3:4-5).
Notice that Paul wrote:
Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? (Romans 6:1-2).
Thus the New Testament makes clear that the law of God continues, thus it was not nailed to the cross or somehow wiped out. - Dr. Robert Thiel
[SIZE=+1]What Does Colossians 2:14 Really Say?[/SIZE]
It is of interest to note that the expression "the handwriting of requirements" is a Greek legal term that signifies the penalty which a lawbreaker had to pay--through Jesus the penalty was wiped out ("the handwriting of requirements"), not the law! "
This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the LORD: I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds I will write them" (Heb 10:16).
Even Protestant commentators realize this. Notice what
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible states about Colossians 2:14:
Whatever was in force against us is taken out of the way. He has obtained for us a legal discharge from the hand-writing of ordinances, which was against us (v. 14), which may be understood,
1. Of that obligation to punishment in which consists the guilt of sin. The curse of the law is the hand-writing against us, like the hand-writing on Belshazzar's wall. Cursed is every one who continues not in every thing. This was a hand-writing which was against us, and contrary to us; for it threatened our eternal ruin. This was removed when he redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us, Gal 3:13. (from Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Modern Edition, Electronic Database. Copyright (c) 1991 by Hendrickson Publishers, Inc.).
Some will argue that you still cannot keep the ten commandments (for "all have sinned"), even if they are all mentioned as being in effect after the crucifixion. Does this mean one should not try?
Furthermore, let's look at another translation:
14 having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross (Colossians 2:14, NASB)
The
handwriting of requirements (often also called the
hand-writing of ordinances) or
certificate of debt was wiped away and nailed to the cross.
Which requirements were wiped out?
Please understand that the expression "the handwriting of requirements" (
cheirógrafon toís dógmasin) is a Greek legal expression that signifies
the penalty which a lawbreaker had to pay--it does not signify the laws that are to be obeyed--only the penalty. It is only through the acceptance of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ that the penalty was wiped out ("the handwriting of requirements"). But only the penalty, not the law! - Dr. Robert Thiel
Now here is an interesting thing about Col 2:16-17, here it is in the NKJV...
Col 2:16 So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths,
Col 2:17 which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ.
So if this passage really does do away with the Sabbath and Holydays as you suggest, then it also must do away with food and drink. Does that make sense to anyone?
(3) The N.T. believer has liberty in the matter of holy days
(Romans 14).
Those who teach that the sabbath is binding upon the Christian, are going contrary to what the Apostles taught.
Why, then, did Jesus keep the Sabbath? He kept the sabbath for the same reason He kept all the other Mosaic laws. He also observed the feasts. Jesus did these things because He was born a Jew, born under the law, that He might fulfill it and redeem His people from its penalty and bondage (Galatians 4:4-5; Romans 9:5).
You say here that He kept the Sabbath and Holydays to redeem His people (I thought He redeemed all people) from the penalty, and that He did. He did not do away with the Law, He paid the penalty for our breaking of the Law. He rather exalted the Law of a far greater place of authority in our lives...
Isa 42:21 The Lord is well pleased for His righteousness’ sake; He will exalt the law and make it honorable.
Mat 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
Mat 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Mat 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
Now all one has to do is read on in Mat 5, 6 and 7 to see what this means...
Mat 5:21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
Mat 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
Having disdain for your brother, calling him useless and denigrating him is now a violation of hte sixth Commandment.
Mat 5:27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
Mat 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
Lusting after one who is not your legitimate spouse is breaking the seventh Commandment and is worthy of death.
Aren't we thankful Christ paid that penalty for us?
1Jn 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
1Jn 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
1Jn 1:10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.
1Jn 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
1Jn 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
Christ did not do away with His Law, the Law
He spoke from atop Mt. Sinai, He rather paid the penalty in our stead so we can be forgiven...
Joh 5:14 Afterward Jesus findeth him in the temple, and said unto him, Behold, thou art made whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee.
So the God who wrote the Law was "under the old covenant" yet somehow says we shouldn't be "under the old covenant", yet He still tells us to follow the Law?
