What you need to understood here is that Paul is addressing "ascetic Gnosticism" which had begun to creep into the Colossian Church.
You are distorting the teaching. What is indicated is that there are two aspects of the Pauline censure, one of which is obviously the ceremonial law, which, while itself "the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good," (Romans 7:12) yet which in its entirety shows man he cannot keep literally it all, and thus Peter calls it "a yoke" "which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear," (Acts 15:10) and Paul states teaches regarding "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." (Colossians 2:16-17)
Gnostic beliefs were simply NOT a shadow of things to come, but laws regarding "meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation, (Hebrews 9:10) were. And thus Paul states regarding "meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days," that Christ blotted "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 2:14)
And thus Paul also mentions circumcision, which was an everlasting statute (Gn. 17) that preceded the law, but which is abrogated under the new covenant.
"In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ." (Colossians 2:11)
If you want to mandate keeping the 7th day sabbath in order to be saved you also need to require circumcision in order to be saved.
However, a brand of Gnostics used Jewish practices as part of their philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ, (Colossians 2:8) and which included false asceticism (Touch not; taste not; handle not) and obeisance to angels, which men were "intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind." (Colossians 2:18)
But by showing the Christians were free from the ceremonial law which were shadows, Paul disarmed the Gnostics and focused them on Christ, not the sabbath or dietary and temple shadows , but the body that made the shadow, from whom "all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God."
They were being ostracized by their pagan neighbors for doing exactly what you folks think Paul was telling them not to do. Think!
That is absurd. Paul is clearly referring to them being judged for not observing the ceremonial ordinances, of which the sabbaths were a part.
f Paul had been writing about the weekly Sabbath he would have used the word SABBATON
A false dilemma fallacy. See here or here .
Do you believe all those who do not keep the 7th day commandment, once told, or the dietary laws, or are Trinitarians, are lost? Just to know how much time i should spend trying to reason with you.
I don't believe I've ever said such a stupid thing (but of course you're welcome to go back and check all my posts for the last decade or so).
You are distorting the teaching........
I'm distorting nothing. I'm just eliminating all the Catholic nonsense that's part of the baggage with this silliness you present.
" that Christ blotted "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 2:14)
You need to educate yourself as to what this really means.........."handwriting of ordinances".
[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;
The Greek: 14ἐξαλείψας upon OBLITERATION-ing (nom|voc) τὸ the (nom|acc) καθ’ down, according to (+acc), against (+gen) ἡμῶν us (gen)χειρόγραφον certificate of debt (nom|acc|voc) τοῖς the (dat) δόγμασιν dogmas (dat) , ὃ who/whom/which (nom|acc) ἦν he/she/it-was ὑπεναντίον adversarial ([Adj] acc, nom|acc|voc) ἡμῖν us (dat) • καὶ and/also αὐτὸ it/same (nom|acc) ἦρκεν he/she/it-has-TAKE UP-ed ἐκ out of (+gen) τοῦ the (gen) μέσου middle ([Adj] gen); be-you(sg)-BE-ing-HALF-DONE!, be-you(sg)-being-BE-ed-HALF-DONE! , προσηλώσας you(sg)-NAIL-ed, upon NAIL-ing (nom|voc) αὐτὸ it/same (nom|acc) τῷ the (dat) σταυρῷ cross (dat) •
Ordinances are from the Greek DOKEO (Dogma) Strong's 1378. The word is also used in [Ephesians 2:15] and variations in [Acts 16:4][Acts 17:7] and [Luke 2:1]. Let's take a look.
[Ephesians 2:15] 15Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances (DOGMA); for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
Sounds about the same as [Colossians 2:14].
[Acts 16:4] 4And as they went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees (DOGMA) "δόγματα" for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem.
[Acts 17:7] 7Whom Jason hath received: and these all do contrary to the decrees (DOGMA) "δογμάτων" of Caesar, saying that there is another king, one Jesus.
[Luke 2:1] 1And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree (DOGMA) "δόγμα" from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed.
Do you notice it? DOGMA is man made decree....as was the Law of Moses...... and the Talmud with its Rabbinical decrees which superseded it.
The Ten Commandments are never called DOGMA because they are divinely given by Yahweh...............not man.
Again....the Church has taken a very simple biblical meaning and twisted it to widen the gap between themselves and their Hebrew origins. Shame on them!