S
Colossians 2:16-17 is often used as a proof text by Sabbath and festival observers in regards to their assertions that believers must keep the weekly Sabbath and Holy Days.
I am a former Sabbath and festival keeper due to my association with Worldwide Church of God.
I remember asking my pastor about this section of Scriptures long ago. Primarily, my question was, if these verses prove that Sabbath and festival keeping is required for Christians, why wasn't the church observing New Moons? My question was met with silence. I was a young believer so I unfortunately dismissed the affair. However, this issue points to the factor of inconsistency amongst some who use this verse to assert that Sabbathkeeping still applies. If they do use it to prove Sabbathkeeping, do they use it also to prove festival observance and new moon observance?
I'd like to give my thoughts on Colossians 2 regarding this topic. Besides the analysis below, one must keep in mind that the Old Covenant is no longer applicable to New Covenant Christians. That is a separate study in itself. I highly recommend the book Sabbath in Christ by Dale Ratzlaff on this topic and the topic of Sabbathkeeping.
Regarding Colossians 2:
The group that was teaching false things in Colossae was probably a group of Essene Jews who were mixing elements of the Old Covenant with other pagan beliefs.
The overall message of Colossians 2 is that believers are complete in Christ, and don't need to follow the teachings of these heretics to approach God. They didn't need any secret knowledge provided by these false teachers. They already had this knowledge in Christ (v. 1-4). Notice how the believers were "filled" or "complete" in Him (v. 10). Notice how they were spiritually circumcised("without hands"), by putting off the body of flesh, through him (v.11). Notice how we are made alive in Him through his death, burial and resurrection (v. 12-15).
You should notice the repetitive use of "in him" or similar references in this part of the chapter. The message was that the Colossians were already complete in Christ. They didn't need to be physically circumcised, and they didn't need any special spiritual knowledge offered by those claiming special insight in order to approach Christ.
If one views Colossians 2:16-17 in light of the fact that the preceding verses are talking about our completeness in Christ, as well as the following verses, one can see that these heretical teachers were attempting to bring the Colossians under control of their teachings. Part of their teachings included observance of the weekly Sabbath, Holy Days, and New Moons.
Notice that these heretical teachers were attempting to restrict their behavior, and to bring the believers under control, all throughout the chapter. They were trying to enforce regulations upon them which didn't apply as they were already complete in Christ.
So, for Paul to mention the Sabbath, Holy Days, and Festivals as binding and required right in the middle of this context (as some Sabbath and festival observers use these verses) does not make sense. These heretics were trying to restrict behavior, not tell them they didn't have to do certain things anymore. Paul, on the other hand, was showing them that they were complete in Christ and did not have to approach God in this way, through asceticism, legalism, and all kinds of rules and regulations.
The context and behavior of these false teachers simply does not fit the assertion that Paul was claiming they needed to keep the Sabbath, Holy Days, and festivals. These teachers were being restrictive. They were not being permissive.
Note that Paul calls these things shadows. The Sabbath and Holy Days were mere shadows of Jesus Christ. Christians have the reality now. Why do they need the shadow? If they are saved, they have the living Christ indwelling them, in fact.
Here's a few additional comments in regards to this. Jews in the New Testament church did continue to observe some elements of the Old Covenant, but these were not required for Gentiles. Read Acts 21 to see where Jews observed elements of the law, including physical circumcision. This chapter infers that such things were not expected of Gentile Christians, due to the ruling in Acts 15. Why did Jews continue to observe these things? I believe it was because they were comfortable with the lifestyle, and they also had witness value. Keeping the festivals and Sabbaths allowed them to continue to interface with their unreached family members. In addition, doing some things would have negated their witness to fellow Jews.
A similar analogy would be if I was a missionary in a Muslim country and walked around with a beer and a ham sandwich in my hand all the time. Those things would be offensive to Muslims. I probably wouldn't get to first base explaining the Gospel message to them. No, I would defer my freedom to do such things in order to maintain my witness with them, even if I had perfect freedom to do those things.
Galatians, in particular, dealt with the topic of Judaizers, who would follow behind Paul and attempt to enforce elements of the Old Covenant upon Gentiles. Paul calls them "dogs" in Philippians 3. And, by that he did not mean nice puppy dogs like we have. He meant vile, filthy, mangy creatures who were always causing trouble.
Some Sabbathkeepers will point to the fact that Jesus kept the Sabbath and Holy Days. Yes, he did. He also was circumcised and that isn't required for me either. He was a Jew under the Old Covenant. In fact, he fulfilled the Law and every prophecy regarding Him.
Some Sabbathkeepers will point to the fact that the apostle Paul kept the Sabbath and Holy Days. Again, Paul was a Jew, and he witnessed to Jews. He went to the synagogues on the Sabbath to reach unsaved Jewish people. In addition, Christians themselves went to the synagogues on the Sabbath. They often met in the synagogues to hear the Scriptures read on the Sabbath, and then met also on Sunday to discuss them from a Christian context. They did not have ready access to the Scriptures today like we do; in many cases they had to go to the synagogue to hear them read.
After heavy Jewish persecution of Christians in about 90 AD, Christians were forced to leave the synagogues. They continued to meet on Sunday as they had been doing before. The vast majority were already meeting on Sunday prior to Constantine's edict concerning Sunday observance in the 300's, despite the assertions of Sabbathkeepers on this topic.
Why does this topic make any difference? The focus of many Sabbathkeepers is not on Jesus Christ and salvation by grace through faith in Him and his sacrifice. It is also about adding irrelevant conditions to the salvation that is a free gift through Jesus Christ.
A fundamental issue concerning this topic is the difference between faith righteousness and works righteousness. As a Sabbathkeeper, I was definitely leaning toward the works righteousness side. I didn't even really understand what the word grace meant. I continually heard sermons about Faith vs. Works, but none about God's grace. Jesus becomes, at best, a back burner issue with many who are caught up in the whole Old Covenant law message.
I am a former Sabbath and festival keeper due to my association with Worldwide Church of God.
I remember asking my pastor about this section of Scriptures long ago. Primarily, my question was, if these verses prove that Sabbath and festival keeping is required for Christians, why wasn't the church observing New Moons? My question was met with silence. I was a young believer so I unfortunately dismissed the affair. However, this issue points to the factor of inconsistency amongst some who use this verse to assert that Sabbathkeeping still applies. If they do use it to prove Sabbathkeeping, do they use it also to prove festival observance and new moon observance?
I'd like to give my thoughts on Colossians 2 regarding this topic. Besides the analysis below, one must keep in mind that the Old Covenant is no longer applicable to New Covenant Christians. That is a separate study in itself. I highly recommend the book Sabbath in Christ by Dale Ratzlaff on this topic and the topic of Sabbathkeeping.
Regarding Colossians 2:
The group that was teaching false things in Colossae was probably a group of Essene Jews who were mixing elements of the Old Covenant with other pagan beliefs.
The overall message of Colossians 2 is that believers are complete in Christ, and don't need to follow the teachings of these heretics to approach God. They didn't need any secret knowledge provided by these false teachers. They already had this knowledge in Christ (v. 1-4). Notice how the believers were "filled" or "complete" in Him (v. 10). Notice how they were spiritually circumcised("without hands"), by putting off the body of flesh, through him (v.11). Notice how we are made alive in Him through his death, burial and resurrection (v. 12-15).
You should notice the repetitive use of "in him" or similar references in this part of the chapter. The message was that the Colossians were already complete in Christ. They didn't need to be physically circumcised, and they didn't need any special spiritual knowledge offered by those claiming special insight in order to approach Christ.
If one views Colossians 2:16-17 in light of the fact that the preceding verses are talking about our completeness in Christ, as well as the following verses, one can see that these heretical teachers were attempting to bring the Colossians under control of their teachings. Part of their teachings included observance of the weekly Sabbath, Holy Days, and New Moons.
Notice that these heretical teachers were attempting to restrict their behavior, and to bring the believers under control, all throughout the chapter. They were trying to enforce regulations upon them which didn't apply as they were already complete in Christ.
So, for Paul to mention the Sabbath, Holy Days, and Festivals as binding and required right in the middle of this context (as some Sabbath and festival observers use these verses) does not make sense. These heretics were trying to restrict behavior, not tell them they didn't have to do certain things anymore. Paul, on the other hand, was showing them that they were complete in Christ and did not have to approach God in this way, through asceticism, legalism, and all kinds of rules and regulations.
The context and behavior of these false teachers simply does not fit the assertion that Paul was claiming they needed to keep the Sabbath, Holy Days, and festivals. These teachers were being restrictive. They were not being permissive.
Note that Paul calls these things shadows. The Sabbath and Holy Days were mere shadows of Jesus Christ. Christians have the reality now. Why do they need the shadow? If they are saved, they have the living Christ indwelling them, in fact.
Here's a few additional comments in regards to this. Jews in the New Testament church did continue to observe some elements of the Old Covenant, but these were not required for Gentiles. Read Acts 21 to see where Jews observed elements of the law, including physical circumcision. This chapter infers that such things were not expected of Gentile Christians, due to the ruling in Acts 15. Why did Jews continue to observe these things? I believe it was because they were comfortable with the lifestyle, and they also had witness value. Keeping the festivals and Sabbaths allowed them to continue to interface with their unreached family members. In addition, doing some things would have negated their witness to fellow Jews.
A similar analogy would be if I was a missionary in a Muslim country and walked around with a beer and a ham sandwich in my hand all the time. Those things would be offensive to Muslims. I probably wouldn't get to first base explaining the Gospel message to them. No, I would defer my freedom to do such things in order to maintain my witness with them, even if I had perfect freedom to do those things.
Galatians, in particular, dealt with the topic of Judaizers, who would follow behind Paul and attempt to enforce elements of the Old Covenant upon Gentiles. Paul calls them "dogs" in Philippians 3. And, by that he did not mean nice puppy dogs like we have. He meant vile, filthy, mangy creatures who were always causing trouble.
Some Sabbathkeepers will point to the fact that Jesus kept the Sabbath and Holy Days. Yes, he did. He also was circumcised and that isn't required for me either. He was a Jew under the Old Covenant. In fact, he fulfilled the Law and every prophecy regarding Him.
Some Sabbathkeepers will point to the fact that the apostle Paul kept the Sabbath and Holy Days. Again, Paul was a Jew, and he witnessed to Jews. He went to the synagogues on the Sabbath to reach unsaved Jewish people. In addition, Christians themselves went to the synagogues on the Sabbath. They often met in the synagogues to hear the Scriptures read on the Sabbath, and then met also on Sunday to discuss them from a Christian context. They did not have ready access to the Scriptures today like we do; in many cases they had to go to the synagogue to hear them read.
After heavy Jewish persecution of Christians in about 90 AD, Christians were forced to leave the synagogues. They continued to meet on Sunday as they had been doing before. The vast majority were already meeting on Sunday prior to Constantine's edict concerning Sunday observance in the 300's, despite the assertions of Sabbathkeepers on this topic.
Why does this topic make any difference? The focus of many Sabbathkeepers is not on Jesus Christ and salvation by grace through faith in Him and his sacrifice. It is also about adding irrelevant conditions to the salvation that is a free gift through Jesus Christ.
A fundamental issue concerning this topic is the difference between faith righteousness and works righteousness. As a Sabbathkeeper, I was definitely leaning toward the works righteousness side. I didn't even really understand what the word grace meant. I continually heard sermons about Faith vs. Works, but none about God's grace. Jesus becomes, at best, a back burner issue with many who are caught up in the whole Old Covenant law message.
