When does wrong become right?

Ross · Seventh-day Adventist Joined: 07 Jan 2004 Posts: 45

Dear Eugene,
In my last attempt to get people to think about Col. 2, I was dubbed to be in error - that was not what the compilers of the Webster's Dictionary thought, but What do they know?
My error was really seeking to assist. So this trip I instead will ask for assistance - who knows, we might get somewhere.

My very serious question is:- In Col. 2:16 there are two words, "meat" and "drink." I understand that they are two nouns. i.e. two names of things. Now, watch this. They are the supposed translations of "brosis" and "posis" two participial verbs. i.e. two doing words. i.e. "Eating" and "drinking." Remarkable.

Remarkable, because by getting it wrong permits the unwary mind to misunderstand the sacred Word. But it gets worse because people are then taught that the two false words don't matter because they refer to the old Ceremonial law. This is O.K. by those who are not heaven-bound anyway, why should they care? But there is a problem.

There is a problem because a few people like me have a rooted objection to being deceived. I have a heaven to win and a hell to shun, and I intend to do that. The easiest way to achieve that is to get myself un-deceived by recognising that the apostle Paul was saying that, the false teachers of Collossae were trying to persuade the flock that they could only be saved if they entered into neo-platonistic philosophy and by refusing to eat or drink until after the first hour of the day had passed, in honour of the angels of the stars. This, said the apostle, would disqualify them. Of course
if that was true, then we have hit on the genuine heresy Paul was warning against, haven't we?

However, maybe I am wrong again?? But your failure to detail my error in my last post on this subject, leaves me little confidence in getting any assistance with this one.
Sincerely,
Ross
_________________
R.R. Pollock

Ross · Seventh-day Adventist Joined: 07 Jan 2004 Posts: 45

Dear Brethren,
We find, in Col. 2:14, that the handwriting was against us because the dogma was contrary to us. Many imagine that the dogma refers to a law of God i.e. either the ten commandments, or the ceremonial law. But neither is correct, for a dogma is not so much a body of law, as a decree, and what is the decree concerning a man's sin? Surely, it is "The wages of sin is death." Or, if you prefer, "The soul that sinneth it shall die." Either way, the decree is very much against us unless Jesus comes to the party. And that is exactly what He decided to do.
Jesus, took our note of debt to God which we could not pay, and paid it Himself on the cross. And this is exactly what the apostle Paul described for us in Col. 2.
I had written earlier on a previous post that, a metaphor was only used for the purpose of "comparison" and lo, we have the "comparison."
Note:- Back in those days, and in particular, in that area, it was the custom for a Creditor to take the written account of the Debitor once it had been paid either by forgiveness or full payment, cut it in half, and nail it to the door of him who owed it in full view of all the passersby, that they might be witness to the fact that the debt had been paid.
Jesus, paid our debt to God by being spiked - on behalf of the Jews, the people of God, and then slashed with a Roman spear on behalf of the gentiles. This is why, Paul could later write, "Now, there is no difference between Jew or gentile, for both are one in Christ."
Sincerely,
Ross
It should be noted that only in this way, do we gain any understanding about the reason for Jesus' body being slashed with a spear.
_________________
R.R. Pollock

Eugene Shubert · Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 8:58 pm Post subject: Colossians 2:16,17

Colossians 2:16,17 :: Young's Literal Translation (YLT)

"Let no one, then, judge you in eating or in drinking, or in respect of a feast, or of a new moon, or of sabbaths, which are a shadow of the coming things" (Colossians 2:16,17).

Ross,

I still don't understand your interpretation of these verses. Is Paul saying, "Let no one, then, judge you for your embrace of neo-platonistic philosophy, or for your annual feasts, or monthly new moon celebrations, or your weekly Sabbaths, which are a shadow of the coming things?"

Ross · Seventh-day Adventist Joined: 07 Jan 2004 Posts: 45

Dear Eugene,
Thankyou for bringing the truth of Paul's writing to the surface. The answer to your direct question is no. I do not have any reason whatsoever for thinking that.
Paul is advising people that, in matters concerning salvation they need not enter into cultic mysticism, nor permit anyone to even comment however mildly, approvingly or disapprovingly, on their refusal to do so by eating or not eating, drinking or not drinking according to Grecian philosophical mandates, or regulations which, if followed through, would displace Christ and ultimately disqualify them from salvation. cf v 8.
No mere mortal has any right says Paul, to decide for another how to please God. A Christian is drawn and called by God the Holy Spirit, and by Him alone. The Lord alone gives to every man his work. Not some other man.
It is helpful to realise that the times, seasons, months and days enumerated by Paul do not stand under the sign of salvation but under the sign of the ever-changing patterns of nature, though pushed for all they are worth by philosophers both then and now. The Sabbath day or days - it matters not which, were to be observed by fasting according to the Grecian Philosophers regulations. To this Paul declares that, salvation is not aquired by ritualism but by living faith in Christ.

I cannot now remember if I cited my own experience as a young person in the Anglican Church which was visited by a Missioner who had the crazy idea that, the very things we are here discussing were necessary for salvation and therefore had us come to church every day of the week without any breakfast, and certainly no drink, for the first hour of the day. Thereafter we went home ate drank and took off for work. His concept was from neo-Platonism which he thought was Christian, the idea being that if we carried out those silly hare-brained ideas, God would be very pleased and we were assured a place in the kingdom of God. Not merely sitting at the back, but right up front.
Of course if we did not carry out those rituals God would become extremely angry and then, see who caught hell. Those were the exact ideas Paul had wasted his time warning all Christians against.
Sincerely,
Ross
_________________
R.R. Pollock