"For the letter killeth, but the spirit gives life", 2 corinthians 3:6

[thethinker]

You're twisting that passage, it does not say that the Sabbath(or the Law)or shadows were nailed to the cross. He talks about shadows in a present and future tense, so how can he say they are a thing of the past?

Col 2:17 Which are(present tense) a shadow of things to come(future tense)

You never answered the question on whether or not Yahushua has fulfilled all the Feasts, iow has He come a second time already? If not, then there are still some shadows/Feasts that have not been fulfilled.

I replied to you indicating that the present tense is also used in reference to Christ as the "substance" of those things. I don't know what you think the present tense is supposed to prove.

Christ is the "substance" in that He is the fulfillment of the whole law. He IS (present tense) the fulfillment of the whole law, including the feasts:

"Christ is the END of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes" (Rom. 10:4).

Now you want Christ + the feasts + the letter + the sabbath and + everything else. But the Protestant Reformation had it right. It is NOT Christ + anything. IT IS "SOLA CHRISTOS", THAT IS CHRIST ALONE!!!!!!!!!!!!

[diffangle]

I replied to you indicating that the present tense is also used in reference to Christ as the "substance" of those things. I don't know what you think the present tense is supposed to prove.

Christ is the "substance" in that He is the fulfillment of the whole law. He IS (present tense) the fulfillment of the whole law, including the feasts:

"Christ is the END of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes" (Rom. 10:4).

Now you want Christ + the feasts + the letter + the sabbath and + everything else. But the Protestant Reformation had it right. It is NOT Christ + anything. IT IS "SOLA CHRISTOS", THAT IS CHRIST ALONE!!!!!!!!!!!!

So your saying the Feast that is a shadow of His second coming has been fulfilled? When was His second coming?

[thethinker]

So your saying the Feast that is a shadow of His second coming has been fulfilled? When was His second coming?

I asked you before to show me how you connect the Feast with Christ's second coming. Will you please?

Thanks

[Mograce2U]

Originally Posted by valleybldr
What's sad is that many Christians can't restrain themselves from judging (condemning) others who walk in good conscience by the Word. todd

Because of the SDA mentality that goes around condemning everyone else they think that's what we're talking about. They can't see that we are not condemning them at all but that they are judging and condemning us by their words, attitudes and actions JUST LIKE the SDA's do to them and the Pharisees did to Yeshua.

This is where it gets a bit confusing doesn't it? Who is persecuting whom? Legalism takes many forms, some of which are more subtle than others, with traditions being one of the paths into it. Thinker appears to me to be trying to find out what the passage is telling us and is not judging anybody.

If we are to understand this passage in Col 2 we have to find the main point of what is being said first before we can examine the details. 2:17 seems to be the key to the point Paul is making.

(Col 2:17 KJV) Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

(Col 2:17 NIV) These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.

It seems clear that whatever the shadowy things were pointing to that the reality of those things is found in the body of Christ. Not in the form or the ritual but in the spiritual reality of being now dead to that and alive to Christ. That the Law has no governing authority over a dead man; the passage brings out that point as well. It can neither curse him nor bless him. The man who is born of the Spirit, is ruled by the Spirit.

Now whether or not one wants to deduce from that, that he ought to still celebrate in the shadowy things, I suppose is up to him. In the day that Paul wrote to the Colossians, the body of Christ was still being formed, but it is firmly established in our day. And since both Jews and non-Jews are a part of it, I also suppose this debate over traditions will never cease!

[thethinker]

Thinker appears to me to be trying to find out what the passage is telling us and is not judging anybody.

Mograce,

I am thankful for your defense but I am not without sin. I am somewhat judgmental. I see the burden of guilt being laid by those who call themselves "Pastors". They lay burdens on people about tithing and keeping the sabbath and this and that.

When my 16 year old daughter was offered her first job as a grocery cashier she was very excited. It was her first job. She felt adult like. She was excited about her new found independence.

But she had to work Sundays. So my wife and I told her that she could work Sundays with certain restrictions. We made it clear to her that she could not work until after 2:00 pm so the worship of God was not neglected.

Well, after the very first youth night she came home and went to her room crying. My wife and I came to her and asked her why she was crying. She said that the youth minister told her that she is sinning by working on Sunday and then added "Your problem is that you believe your dad".

So I let the man have it for his unkind and judgmental words.

Jesus said this: "The hour is coming and now is that you will no longer worship in Jerusalem. God is spirit. They that worship Him MUST worship Him in spirit and in truth" (John 4).

When Jesus nullified the worship of God in Jerusalem He nullified the whole old covenant package. He nullified the "letter" of worship. Therefore, no man is permitted to dicate. So we told our daughter to stand against the guilt manipulators. We told her that they carry their childhood and old covenant baggage into their relationship with God and His people.

Again, thanks for the defense. But to be honest I am a tad judgmental.

[diffangle]

I asked you before to show me how you connect the Feast with Christ's second coming. Will you please?

Thanks

http://www.justgivemethetruth.com/sabbath_feasts.htm

Feast of Trumpets - this year on September 27 - Rosh Hash Anah A day of blowing trumpets which were traditionally used to call people together (Numbers 10). In Matthew 24:31 we learn that Yahshuah will gather His elect from the four winds of the earth at His return.

"And YHWH spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, In the seventh month, in the first day of the month, shall ye have a sabbath, a memorial of blowing of trumpets, an holy convocation. Ye shall do no servile work therein: but ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto YHWH." (Lev 23:23-25)

Feast of Tabernacles - October 11 - October 18 - Points to the Millennial Reign of Yahshua on earth following His return. It is a Feast of seven days spent learning what that Kingdom will be like. For the moment, the present earth and world is forgotten and one learns what the one coming will be like, what Yahweh's standards of righteousness are and compliance to those standards.

[Studyin'2Show]

So your saying the Feast that is a shadow of His second coming has been fulfilled? When was His second coming?

I think he's a preterist so he does think everything has already been fulfilled.
If I'm wrong let me know, thethinker!

[Studyin'2Show]

"Christ is the END of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes" (Rom. 10:4).

Now you want Christ + the feasts + the letter + the sabbath and + everything else. But the Protestant Reformation had it right. It is NOT Christ + anything. IT IS "SOLA CHRISTOS", THAT IS CHRIST ALONE!!!!!!!!!!!!

Messiah IS the end of the Law FOR RIGHTEOUSNESS! Absolutely! The value in God's Law for the believer is NOT for righteousness. This is where I believe the confusion lie. No one, NOT ONE whose posted in support of God's Law has said that it is to attain righteousness. Why do you continue to throw up that straw man that is so easy to knock over? Of course the law FOR RIGHTEOUSNESS has ended. So, is the Law of God sin? NO NO NO!!! According to Paul it is not sin. So, WHY WHY WHY do so many continue to give me and others a problem for not murdering, and not coveting, and not committing adultery and YES keeping holy the Sabbath? WHY? It is clearly NOT SIN! So why the problem? I have not told you or anyone else what you must do. I have not tied any requirements beyond faith to bring salvation. Why is this always such an issue?

Messiah Alone! Only Yeshua! Sola Scriptura is EXACTLY what I'm talking about! Scripture! ALL of it! Okay! Rant over!

God Bless!

[diffangle]

I think he's a preterist so he does think everything has already been fulfilled.
If I'm wrong let me know, thethinker!

That would explain some things then.

TT... are you a preterist that believes the second coming has occured?

[thethinker]

http://www.justgivemethetruth.com/sabbath_feasts.htm

Feast of Trumpets - this year on September 27 - Rosh Hash Anah A day of blowing trumpets which were traditionally used to call people together (Numbers 10). In Matthew 24:31 we learn that Yahshuah will gather His elect from the four winds of the earth at His return.

"And YHWH spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, In the seventh month, in the first day of the month, shall ye have a sabbath, a memorial of blowing of trumpets, an holy convocation. Ye shall do no servile work therein: but ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto YHWH." (Lev 23:23-25)

Feast of Tabernacles - October 11 - October 18 - Points to the Millennial Reign of Yahshua on earth following His return. It is a Feast of seven days spent learning what that Kingdom will be like. For the moment, the present earth and world is forgotten and one learns what the one coming will be like, what Yahweh's standards of righteousness are and compliance to those standards.

Sorry Diff. But I still don't see your connection of the feast of Tabs with the second coming. Somebody is reading the New Testament into the Old Testement.

Also, you said that Christ will return to establish a kingdom on earth. But Paul said that at the resurrection Christ would return as a SUBJECT, not as a King:

"The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For he has put all things under His feet. But when He says 'all things are put under Him,' it is evident that he who put all things under Him is excepted. Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all" (1 Cor. 15:26-28).

This is a clear statement. It is saying that Christ will GIVE UP His kingship to the Father at the resurrection. With this being the case how can Christ become a "millennial" king?

This is not Preterist interpretation though it fits with Preterism well. Non-Preterists have said this too:

Albert Barnes: "The interpretation that affirms that the Son shall then be subject to the Father in the sense of laying down His delegated authority, and ceasing to exercise His mediatorial reign, has been the common interpretation of all time" (Barnes Note on 1 Corinthians 15, p. 302).

Charles Hodge: "When the work of redemption has been accomplished, the dead raised, the judgment held, the ememies of Christ all subdued to Him, then, and not until then, will the Son ALSO BE SUBJECT to Him [God].... The subjection of the Son to the Father means precisely what is meant by His delivering up the kingdom to the Father"(1 & 11 Corinthians p. 333).

I cite these non-Preterists to show you that Christ's return as "subject" rather than king is not a Preterist thing. Whether Preterist or Futurist does not matter. At the time of the resurrection the Son "Himself" becomes a"subject" in His Father's kingdom. Therefore, He does NOT return to establish a "millennial" kingdom seeing that He gives up His kingship at that time.

I know you're thinking about the Olivet discourse that says that the Son will return "in His kingdom". But this has reference to His rule over the Jews of His own generation who rejected Him. The Olivet Discourse had to do with Christ's judgment upon the generation that rejected Him. It was fulfilled in ad70.

Note that Barnes said that "the interpretation that affirms that the Son shall then be 'subject' is the 'common interpretation of all times'".

I think you have allowed yourself to be influenced by Dispensationalism. If I am wrong you may correct me.

[Studyin'2Show]

I think that clears up quite a bit! We have definitely come to the point of agreeing to disagree! BTW, I'm not a futurist, a preterist, or a dispensationalist. I am simply a disciple of Yeshua. I hear His voice and I follow Him! Thanks for the lively discourse.

God Bless!

[diffangle]

Sorry Diff. But I still don't see your connection of the feast of Tabs with the second coming. Somebody is reading the New Testament into the Old Testement.

Did Paul not say that the Feasts are shadows of things to come? Was he reading the NT into the OT? You don't see the connection? Paul saw the connection which he says are shadows of things to come.

[Brother Mark]

Messiah IS the end of the Law FOR RIGHTEOUSNESS! Absolutely! The value in God's Law for the believer is NOT for righteousness. This is where I believe the confusion lie. No one, NOT ONE whose posted in support of God's Law has said that it is to attain righteousness. Why do you continue to throw up that straw man that is so easy to knock over? Of course the law FOR RIGHTEOUSNESS has ended. So, is the Law of God sin? NO NO NO!!! According to Paul it is not sin. So, WHY WHY WHY do so many continue to give me and others a problem for not murdering, and not coveting, and not committing adultery and YES keeping holy the Sabbath? WHY? It is clearly NOT SIN! So why the problem? I have not told you or anyone else what you must do. I have not tied any requirements beyond faith to bring salvation. Why is this always such an issue?

Messiah Alone! Only Yeshua! Sola Scriptura is EXACTLY what I'm talking about! Scripture! ALL of it! Okay! Rant over!

God Bless!

How can Christ be the "end of the Law for righteousness" when righteousness never came by law to begin with? Was the Law ever for righteousness?

[Mograce2U]

Did Paul not say that the Feasts are shadows of things to come? Was he reading the NT into the OT? You don't see the connection? Paul saw the connection which he says are shadows of things to come.

The things to come of which the reality is found in the body of Christ. Why do you move beyond that part of the passage to some future thing as though it were not yet here?

[Studyin'2Show]

How can Christ be the "end of the Law for righteousness" when righteousness never came by law to begin with? Was the Law ever for righteousness?

Ask Paul! Good to see you, BTW!