Michael Scheifler is a Sabbath-keeper; a Seventh-day Adventist. As I am not Seventh-day Adventist, I’ve decided – after seeing an essay The Shadow Sabbaths of Colossians 2:17 of his on his website for years and noticing no response to it – to write a rebuttal myself. However, this might not be what you as the reader would expect as a rebuttal to his defending of the Sabbath day. Why?
Well,
it’s because I keep the Sabbath, too.
Mr. Scheifler says in his essay:
There are some who would point to Colossians 2:16 as evidence that today the Christian is released by God from observing any holy day what-so-ever. The main reason they cite this verse is to show that there is no need for the “New Testament” Christian to observe the biblical Sabbath day (Saturday), and that anyone who does advocate Sabbath keeping is a legalist and an enemy of salvation by grace alone.
I completely agree with this statement, but will add this: Seventh-day Adventist hold to a similar idea to what is expressed here; one difference is that they believe that this release applies not to the (seventh-day) Sabbath, but to God’s annual Sabbaths.
Ceremonial, Temple
Law
He says, referring to passages taken from
Hebrews, “The law spoken of there is the ceremonial law connected
with the symbolic sacrificial system of animal sacrifices, and offerings of food
and drink at the Temple. The yearly ceremonial sabbaths that the Jews observed
in connection with the Temple or Sanctuary were a shadow, or prophetic in
nature, of future events.”
Firstly, I have to say that the use of
the word “ceremonial” is questionable to me. He seems to use the
word as if it does not apply to things such as the Sabbath, baptism and the Lord’s
Supper; all of these are very much ceremonial.
Second, certainly, yes, the annual
Sabbaths are connected to the Sanctuary system, but not them alone. From the
Law, we see this written:
NIV Numbers 28:9 On the Sabbath day, make an
offering of two lambs a year old without defect, together with
its drink offering and a grain offering of two-tenths of an ephah
of fine flour mixed with oil.
NIV Numbers 28:10 This is the burnt
offering for every Sabbath, in addition to the regular burnt
offerings and its drink offerings.
So,
we see that weekly Sabbath is also connected to the Sanctuary. I agree, as I
believe Mr. Scheifler does, that the physical Sanctuary rites are being
performed in heaven, the physical Sanctuary a model of the one in heaven
(Hebrews 9:24). And, with the Melchizedek priesthood in place now, not the
Levite priesthood Hebrews 6:20) and with the sacrificial system no longer
maintained on earth, the question is: can these days exist outside the
sacrificial context?
I
believe they can.
The
very first time the Feast of Unleavened Bread was kept, there is no
mention of sacrifice (Exodus 12). This was a whole seven days; and this
was with no Sanctuary, no sacrifices or offerings. If sacrifices were so
integral with the annual Feasts then this would have been impossible, and yet
it happened.
Surely,
this shows that they are not so interwoven with the sacrifices that they cannot
exist without them. Sacrifices are but one aspect.
Tense Issues?
He says, “Verse 17 is saying that the sabbath days referred to in verse 16 were ‘shadows’ of things to come.”
I don’t like his use of the past tense here (the word “were”). Look at the passage he is referring to from the KJV:
Colossians 2:16 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 days:
Colossians 2:17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.
Notice in verse 17 the bolded word “are”. I’ve observed that it in Adventist circles the word “were” is frequently used to express the shadow status of these times. However, it is present tense; they are shadow. Paul used the Greek word esti, the present-active form of the verb ‘to be’.
We know they are still shadow for quite a few reasons. Even sticking only to the early spring Festival period how we know they are shadow readily comes to mind. Jesus said:
NKJV Luke 22:15
“With fervent desire I have desired to eat this Passover with
you before I suffer;
NKJV Luke 22:16 for I say to you, I will no longer eat of it until it is
fulfilled in the kingdom of God.”
What Jesus refers to as “this Passover” is what is commonly known as the “Last Supper”. Jesus’ own words declare that the Passover points way beyond the death of Christ to the very Kingdom!
Mr.
Scheifler wrote, “Prior
to the incarnation of Jesus and his crucifixion, all the […]
festivals awaited their fulfillment.”
This is true. But, as we’ve seen
through the example of the Passover, and as a study into these
Festivals’ meanings would show, they still await their
fulfillment.
Of course, that is not to say that
partial fulfillment was not achieved at the death of Jesus. Once again using
the Passover example, we find testimony from Paul that Jesus is the Passover
Lamb (1 Corinthians 5:7-8); a fulfillment of Passover. But, we can’t
ignore Jesus’ statement that Passover will be fulfilled in the Kingdom.
It’s very clear from Mr. Scheifler’s
essay that he does not believe they were all completely fulfilled in at the
death of Jesus. He has, among Adventists that I’ve come to know to any
degree, more awareness and understanding of the Festivals; so at first, it
baffled me why he would use the word “were” there. But, after
reading through it again, it seems he’s using past tense to express to
the idea that they were kept (by Jews), as opposed to not being kept now
(by Christians).
Regardless, though, I believe the
clarification I made above is important foundation for the sake of the reader.
Which Sabbath?
Let’s look at vs. 16 and 17 of
Colossians 2. Mr. Scheifler quoted from Mr. Scheifler’s essay:
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 days which are a shadow of
things to come; but the body is of Christ.
Notice something important here: the word
“holyday” is translated from the Greek heorte, which refers
to the annual Festivals (as in Luke 2:41 and John 7:2). Mr. Scheifler is saying
that Paul is referring to the annual Sabbaths here, and not the weekly Sabbath.
But to me, it seems a bit of an unnatural way for Paul to express it. Each
Appointed Time (except Passover) either is a Sabbath in itself or contains at
least one (see Leviticus 23). So, to refer to the heorte would already
cover the annual Sabbaths. It seems a bit strange to me that Paul would mention
the Festivals, then go to New Moons, and then jump back to the Festivals
again.
Look at the order in which Paul states the times here. Holyday,
New Moon (Festival), Sabbath. Annual Holyday, monthly New Moon, weekly
Sabbath. That fits a lot better, doesn’t it? I believe so. And so, it
makes sense to me that the weekly Sabbath is being referred to in this
passage.
[Brief note: While I doubt Mr. Scheifler
would fall into this category, I believe it’s mentioning here that the
word “days” as seen in the King James Version of this passage was
not in the original Greek text (which is why it’s in italics in the King
James Version). Linguistically, there is no distinction between the word
“sabbath” here and the word “sabbath” in verses like Matthew 28:1, Acts 13:14 and Acts 16:13. Also, plural references to Sabbath elsewhere are accepted as
referring to the weekly Sabbath (e.g. Leviticus 23:38, quoted by Mr.
Scheifler); so, it doesn’t warrant suggesting this refers to the annual
Sabbaths.]
The Shadow
Sabbath
After quoting the fourth commandment from Exodus 20:8-11, Mr.
Scheifler makes this statement, “Because it is only commemorative,
and not a shadow of things to come, the weekly Seventh-day Sabbath is really
not part of the discussion in Colossians 2:17.”
True, the Sabbath is commemorative; but not only
commemorative. The writer of Hebrews penned these words:
Hebrews 4:1 Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being
left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come
short of it.
Hebrews
4:11 Let us
labor therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after
the same example of unbelief.
We know that he was writing to believers
(Hebrews 3:1) and yet, he spoke of them (and himself) as entering a future
rest. He links this rest with the weekly Sabbath in this way:
NIV Hebrews 4:9 There
remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God;
So, we see that
the Sabbath rest points to a future rest. Instead of diminishing the
glory of the weekly Sabbath, I believe this status as “shadow” enriches
it with meaning. Yes, I do believe that it is a memorial, commemorating the
end of Creation;
the day on which my God
ceased from creative work
and that he blessed and set apart. Adding to that the knowledge that this day
also points to the sweet rest of his Kingdom makes the day even more beautiful
and significant to me as to cease from my work.
It’s the
same things as with baptism. Baptism is a shadow. As Paul wrote:
Romans 6:4 Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
Romans 6:5
For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we
also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection,
Being baptized is
a picture of that time when the baptized will be raised into immortal life in
Christ’s likeness in the way we raised out of the water. But it being a
shadow does not diminish its meaning, but rather gives it
meaning. Clearly, being a shadow does not make something obsolete; and Paul,
knowing this, could not be saying that it is.
Remember, too,
that the Passover is also not only shadow, but commemorative
(Deuteronomy 16:1). Being a shadow is not mutually exclusive with being
commemorative.
The Teaching Law
Mr. Scheifler makes this statement: “The schoolmaster was
the yearly ceremonial sabbaths associated with the Hebrew Temple, which taught
the plan of salvation through a coming Messiah, the lamb of God. Now that
salvation through Jesus of Nazareth is clear to the Gentile church, there is no
further need of the schoolmaster (the earthly Temple, its ceremonies and shadow
sabbaths) because that lesson has been learned by those with faith.”
This idea is based on
Galatians 3:24-26, which he quoted:
Galatians3:24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
Galatians 3:25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
Galatians
3:26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
Mr. Scheifler seems to be saying that Paul here is referring only to the
Temple system with annual Sabbaths, etc. He goes on to explain,
“[…] nowhere does the Bible indicate that one of the Ten
Commandments has been abrogated, or that the disciples or Jesus abandoned the
weekly Seventh-day Sabbath for Sunday keeping.” So, he’s saying that Paul is saying one
“law” is schoolmaster and abrogated, while the other is not.
But is this what Paul was saying? I don’t believe so. One key
verse in this chapter shows us that this is not so:
Galatians
3:21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if
there had been a law given which could have given life, verily
righteousness should have been by the law.
Galatians 3:22 But the Scripture hath concluded all
under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them
that believe.
Galatians 3:23 But before faith came, we were kept
under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
Galatians 3:24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to
bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
Notice something here. Paul brings all of the Law together when he says
that no Law given by God can give life. Read the chapter and
you’ll see that this verse is a springboard for verses 24-26;
meaning the thoughts of these three verses are born out of verse 21. So,
Paul’s not referring to the annual Holy Times and Temple system alone,
but to the entire Law of God!
The Law shows us our sins (Romans 7:7); and so, shows us that we need a
Redeemer. But it is still the guide that shows us how to live. After seeing
that Jesus saves us, we obey because of love for him (1 John 5:2-3).
So, yes, the (whole) Law guides all us to Christ; but does that
mean that its purpose ends there? Once one has come to accept Christ,
does the Law, specifically these Holy Days, serve no further purpose? Was that
the only purpose that God had in mind when he commanded reverence to his
sacred times? I do not believe so. Another of Paul’s letters tells me
that this is not true.
1 Corinthians 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
1 Corinthians 5:8 Therefore let us keep the feast,
not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness;
but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.
Mr. Scheifler makes mention of this Feast’s meaning and purpose in
his essay; to me, these two verses speak of a meaning of the Feast that makes
it very applicable today. It’s a yearly reminder of how important
putting out sinfulness is, just as the Lord’s Supper, which Paul mentions
six chapters later is a reminder of Jesus’ Passover suffering and death
(1 Corinthians 11:23-25). If the Lord’s Supper is relevant as such a
reminder and proclamation, why can’t the Feast of Unleavened Bread be the
same?
I know that the Feasts’ purpose does not end with acceptance of
Jesus because of a prophecy that has brought hope to me ever since I’d
learnt of it. It’s one that heralds the coming time when the Lord himself
will rule the planet Earth; will rule as righteous King, bringing his Law to
the forlorn people of his worldwide Kingdom. The prophecy states:
Zechariah
14:6 And it shall come to pass that everyone who is left
of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall go up from year to year
to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the Feast of Tabernacles.
Zechariah 14:17
And it shall be that whichever of the families of the earth do not come up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, on them there will be no rain.Zechariah 14:19 This shall be the punishment of Egypt and the punishment of all the nations that do not come up to keep the Feast of Tabernacles.
Here, centuries before the birth of Messiah, the Lord Yahweh spoke
through his prophet Zechariah declaring his intention for this Law: that it be
part of the Kingdom he’d establish. This shows that he instituted the
Appointed Times (of which the Feast of Tabernacles is the penultimate in the
year) to have meaning and purpose that goes past the death of Jesus, or even the
acceptance of his death by faith.
Mr. Scheifler says, “Indeed the Bible makes clear, that in
the future all believers will keep the true Seventh-day Sabbath.”
Yes, the Bible does speak of the Sabbath being kept in the Kingdom; I believe
that with all my heart.
But the Bible also says that God had even from centuries before
Christ the intention that all his subjects in the Kingdom observe his
Festivals; the intention that the Law of Moses should continue beyond the first
Advent and even the second.
We can’t avoid that truth.
What Is Paul Talking About
Then?
I think this time would be good to review what I’ve said so far.
1. The annual Holy Times can be celebrated without
sacrifices or the Temple.
2. The Sabbaths Paul refers to in Colossians 2 are
shadows of what’s coming, not were.
3. The weekly Sabbath is also a shadow of the future
repose of the faithful.
4. The whole Law is schoolmaster, not just the
Festivals or Sanctuary system.
5. The Law (as typified by the Feast of Tabernacles) was declared
by God (and thus intended by him) to continue into his Kingdom, even though he
knew Jesus would come to die.
You may be wondering where I’m going here. After all, it’s
so very clear that Paul’s saying some law is no longer mandated; so, the
Colossians needn’t worry about others judging them over whether they keep
these things.
Well; first of all, there’s something you should notice here.
Quoting Colossians 2:16 again:
Colossians 2:16 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 days:
Notice Paul says in respect to, or in regard to; not
“whether or not you keep”. So, there’s nothing here to
warrant saying it’s referring to whether or not they’re kept.
Second, you may want to notice that throughout the entire letter to the
assembly in Colossae, there’s no reference to “law” at all.
This should be an indication that, unlike the Romans or the Galatians, Paul
didn’t see the Colossians as having a problem seeing the Law in
perspective. So, what is Paul talking about? Early in the chapter, we get the
answer:
Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Even though Paul said in different places that the Gentile needn’t
be circumcised to be considered part of the fold of believers, he never
referred circumcision or anything that came out of the Hebrew Scriptures by the
term “traditions of men” (check for yourself). That would be a
blasphemous statement. So, we see that Paul was referring to man’s
doctrines and not any that come from Scripture.
Paul tells us more of the doctrines of men that he’s battling
here:
Col 2:18 Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility [“false humility” in NIV] and worshiping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,
Colossians 2:20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,
Colossians 2:21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not;
Colossians 2:22 Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men?
Colossians 2:23 Which things have indeed a show of
wisdom in will-worship, and humility, and neglecting of the
body; not in any honor to the satisfying of the flesh.
Notice something about these ideologies? They are rooted in
“neglecting of the body”; ascetic principles that promote (false)
humility and so-called wisdom. These ascetic attitudes are at the root of the
“touch not; taste not; handle not” ideas that Paul was battling.
These ideas were apparently against the indulgence in food and certain
“worldly” pleasures; all for the sake of some false spirituality.
With this in mind, let’s look again at verse 16:
Colossians 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink,
or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon [festival], or of
the sabbath days:
Remembering what we know about the ideologies that Paul’s talking
about, notice something about what Paul mentions here: they are things that can
be enjoyed, which are at odds with the principles of “neglecting
the body”. And so, we see why the Colossians were being
“judged”.
So, why would Paul mention the fact that these Sabbaths are
“shadows”? Well, I submit that it’s to show that these things
have meaning; to further bring home the point that they should let no
one judge them regarding these things because of the fact that they tell of
what will come.
Nailed Out of the Way
Perhaps you wonder what I believe the “handwriting of
ordinances” of verse 14 is. After all, it is what is used to assert that
the Law is “nailed to the cross”. Well, let’s look at that:
Colossians 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
Colossians 2:14 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;
Colossians 2:15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it.
Colossians 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
Colossians 2:17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.
Considering that Paul’s addressing traditions of men here,
wouldn’t it seem out of place for him to mention law here? So, is it law
being addressed? I don’t believe so. All this is building up to show that
they should not allow the false ideas of men to lead them astray. In verses
9-12, Paul makes the case showing that are made full in Christ; then, he
goes on to show their forgiveness.
This is what I believe Paul was addressing here. The BDAG Lexicon says the Greek word cheirographon (“handwriting”) can be rendered “a hand-written document, specif. a certificate of indebtedness”.
With this in mind, we can get a better picture of that Paul meant by understanding one other crucial point: when people were crucified, something other than then were nailed. What exactly it is can be seen by looking at the following verse:
NIV Matthew 27:37 Above his [Jesus’] head they
placed the written charge against him: THIS IS JESUS, THE KING OF
THE JEWS.
The written charge is what I put forward Paul was referring to
here. Instead of the charge against Jesus, the charge against us was
figuratively nailed above his head. He paid the debt for us. Just as Mr.
Scheifler did with verses 16 and 17, I’ll put verses 13 and 14 together
to make a specific point:
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;
Notice that the idea of forgiveness
and blotting out the handwriting of ordinances, nailing them to the cross
are right next to each other. I believe it’s because they are two ways of
expressing the same thing! It is not his own Law that he nailed, but our
sins, thus accomplishing forgiveness for us.
This is why Paul was
saying they should not let those people judge them; they were made full, and
forgiven of their sins by the work of their Saviour; and that is pictured in
these Feasts. The wonderful truths and meanings of these celebrations
outweigh all of these false ideologies of ascetism. They had reason to
eat and drink and enjoy. They had reason to celebrate.
They Are Holy
The purpose of Mr. Scheifler’s essay was to show that the Sabbath
continues into today as mandated reminder of our God’s creation of our
world. But, I believe that in doing so, he downplays the annual Holy Times as
mere remnants of another age; good to study, but no longer mandate. Remember
that God declared them holy; holy just as the weekly Sabbath is holy.
Based on what I’ve shown above, I believe that Paul was not
trying to show the Colossians that anything was abrogated, but to emphasize the
meaning of these Holy Times, including the weekly Sabbath. The fact that
they are shadow gives them (even more) meaning in the absence of a physical
Sanctuary; and it is this that makes them all as dear to my heart as I do not
doubt the weekly Sabbath is to Mr. Scheifler.
To me, people are missing out on so much by not keeping them; no matter
whether we are Israelite or Gentile, God named them sacred. And so, people are dishonouring
and desecrating what is holy by treating them as going the way of the
sacrificial system. You do not need to kill a lamb to keep a sacred day of
rest.
Paul admonished the Corinthians to “keep the Feast” (of
Unleavened Bread, 1 Corinthians 5:8), because it has meaning that were
applicable to them (and us!). My admonition is the same to the reader.
Let’s keep God’s holy times; they are given to believers and are as
wonderful as only something that comes from God can be.
And if we really love God, we’ll revere what he has made holy. ש
Note: Unless otherwise indicated, Bible quotations are
taken from the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible. Bible verses marked NIV
are taken from the New International Version. Scriptures marked NKJV come from
the New King James Version. Bolded and underlined words Bible quotations are my
emphasis, but words in italics from the KJV and NKJV are done so by the
publishers/translators to show that the word is not translated from the
original Greek or Hebrew text. In all quotations, square parentheses indicate
my addition for clarification or otherwise.
© Copyright 2008
Keneil Thomas
This rebuttal does not go very deep into the
ideas raised; for further study, the following are suggested:
·
TCTR Reviewed
– A review of the book entitled Ten Commandments Twice Removed by two
Danny Shelton and Shelly Quinn. (PDF file)
·
Colossians
2: Paul’s True Message – A more in-depth study into Colossians
2.
·
What It Means To Be
Under Grace – A study into “Law” and “Grace”.
·
Sabbath Days
– A look at the“sabbath days” of Colossians 2:16.
·
Feasts of God: The
Hidden Design – An overview of the meaning behind the annual
Festivals instituted by God.
Readers are permitted and encouraged to reproduce this paper in its entirety. To copy subsections, you will require the permission of the author, who may be contact at the e-mail address below. All reproductions and distributions must have the name and e-mail address of the author.
Contact: keneilt@gmail.com