COL 2:16 And The Sabbath - Are You Being Told The Truth?

[3rdAngel]

3rdAngel,
re: "To me all scriptures means all. There is nothing else to figure out IMO."

But how do you know that the writing in question is scripture, i.e., writing which is inspired by a supreme being?

Because the scriptures say that all scripture is given by inspiration of God. We believe this by faith.

 

[3rdAngel]

3rd angel changes scripture.

I would suggest you are changing the meaning of the scriptures as as proven in earlier posts. If you disagree please address post # 960 linked showing why Antiochus Epiphanes does not fit the scripture prophecy of Daniel 8. If you cannot then perhaps it is you who is changing the meaning of the scriptures

 

[3rdAngel]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHICH Sabbath? Weekly? Yearly? Jubilee Sabbath?

Hi TQ, welcome. Good question. As the OP states we are considering the claims of some that Colossians 2 is in reference to God's 4th commandment "seventh day" weekly Sabbath. As you can see we are getting slightly off topic

 

[rstrats]

3rdAngel,
re: "Because the scriptures say that all scripture is given by inspiration of God."

OK, let me try to ask my question in a different way. How do you define scripture?

 

[3rdAngel]

3rdAngel,
re: "Because the scriptures say that all scripture is given by inspiration of God."

OK, let me try to ask my question in a different way. How do you define scripture?

Good question rstrats. For a Christian it is the sacred writings of Christianity contained in the Bible (Old and New Testament).

 

[sooda]

I would suggest you are changing the meaning of the scriptures as as proven in earlier posts. If you disagree please address post # 960 linked showing why Antiochus Epiphanes does not fit the scripture prophecy of Daniel 8. If you cannot then perhaps it is you who is changing the meaning of the scriptures

Daniel wasn't alive during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar.. He was never in Babylon.

That's where the story begins as "history"... and that's why Daniel is NOT considered a prophet in Judaism.. He's an apocalyptic writer.

The first three beasts in Daniel and recorded in known history are Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonian Empire, Cyrus the Great and the Mede/Persian Empire and Alexander the Great and the Macedonian Empire.

In Daniel 11:21-35, the prophet reveals the rise and rule of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the Seleucid king who reigned from 175-164 B.C. Daniel’s prediction involves the rise of Antiochus to power, the conflicts of Antiochus with Egypt (i.e., the king of the South), and his hostilities towards Israel.

For 3 and a half years Antiochus would suppress the practice of the Jewish faith.

According to 1 Maccabees 1:54 (RSV), the forces of Antiochus IV “erected a desolating sacrilege upon the altar of burnt offering” at the site of the Temple in December 167. Three years later; i.e. in December 164, the traditional sacrifices were renewed at the reclaimed and reconsecrated site (1 Macc 4:52, 2 Macc 10:5).

Daniel 8 (the eighth chapter of the Book of Daniel) tells of Daniel 's vision of a two-horned ram destroyed by a one-horned goat (a possible allegory for the transition from the Persian to the Greek eras in the Near East), followed by the history of the "little horn", which is Daniel's code-word for the Greek king Antiochus Epiphanes.

 

[3rdAngel]

Daniel wasn't alive during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar.. He was never in Babylon.

That's where the story begins as "history"... and that's why Daniel is NOT considered a prophet in Judaism.. He's an apocalyptic writer.

The first three beasts in Daniel and recorded in known history are Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonian Empire, Cyrus the Great and the Mede/Persian Empire and Alexander the Great and the Macedonian Empire.

In Daniel 11:21-35, the prophet reveals the rise and rule of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the Seleucid king who reigned from 175-164 B.C. Daniel’s prediction involves the rise of Antiochus to power, the conflicts of Antiochus with Egypt (i.e., the king of the South), and his hostilities towards Israel.

For 3 and a half years Antiochus would suppress the practice of the Jewish faith.

According to 1 Maccabees 1:54 (RSV), the forces of Antiochus IV “erected a desolating sacrilege upon the altar of burnt offering” at the site of the Temple in December 167. Three years later; i.e. in December 164, the traditional sacrifices were renewed at the reclaimed and reconsecrated site (1 Macc 4:52, 2 Macc 10:5).

Daniel 8 (the eighth chapter of the Book of Daniel) tells of Daniel 's vision of a two-horned ram destroyed by a one-horned goat (a possible allegory for the transition from the Persian to the Greek eras in the Near East), followed by the history of the "little horn", which is Daniel's code-word for the Greek king Antiochus Epiphanes.

Goodness I have no idea where you get your information from which I believe has no truth in it. Anyhow I noticed you did not addrress my post # 960 linked showing why Antiochus Epiphanes does not fit the scripture prophecy of Daniel 8. If you cannot then perhaps it is you who is changing the meaning of the scriptures? What you have quoted in Maccabees does not link Antiochus Epiphanes to Danial 8 neither does Daniel 11. The 18+ points in the linked post above show why Antiochus Epiphanes cannot be the little horn of Daniel 8. If you disagree please address the post showing why your interpretation of the scripture is not correct. If your interpretation does not fit the scripture perfectly it is a faulty one. There is 18+ points in the linked post showing why application of the scriptures are in error that you simply ignored without response. I suggest you read them

 

[sooda]

Goodness I have no idea where you get your information from which I believe has no truth in it. Anyhow I noticed you did not addrress my post # 960 linked showing why Antiochus Epiphanes does not fit the scripture prophecy of Daniel 8. If you cannot then perhaps it is you who is changing the meaning of the scriptures? What you have quoted in Maccabees does not link Antiochus Epiphanes to Danial 8 neither does Daniel 11. The 18+ points in the linked post above show why Antiochus Epiphanes cannot be the little horn of Daniel 8. If you disagree please address the post showing why your interpretation of the scripture is not correct. If your interpretation does not fit the scripture perfectly it is a faulty one. There is 18+ points in the linked post showing why application of the scriptures are in error that you simply ignored without response. I suggest you read them

In Daniel 8:21 Daniel 8:21 And the shaggy he-goat is melech Yavan (the king of Greece), and the keren hagedolah (great horn) that is between his eyes is the melech harishon (the first king [ i.e., Alexander]).

 

[sooda]

@ 3rdAngel


Daniel 8.8-9 Alexander the Great and Antiochus IV Epiphanes

Alexander the Great died in his thirties at the height of his power. His kingdom was split into 4 parts under 4 generals: Ptolemy 1 of Egypt and Palestine; Seleucus of Babylonia and Syria; Lysimachus of Asia Minor; and Antipater of Macedonia and Greece.

That's why Dan. 8.8 says "The goat became very powerful. But at the height of its power, its large horn was broken off. In the large horn's place grew four prominent horns pointing in the four directions of the earth."

Then Israel ("the glorious land") was attacked by Antiochus IV Epiphanes (the small horn) in the second century B.C.

That's why 8.9 says "From one of the prominent horns came a small horn whose power grew very great. It extends towards the south and the east and toward the glorious land of Israel."

He was the eighth ruler of the Seleucid Empire (Babylonia and Syria). He overthrew the high priest, looted the Temple, and replaced worship of God with a Greek form of worship. A further fulfilment of this prophecy of a powerful horn will occur in their future with the coming of the Antichrist (see 8.17,19,23; 11.36; 2 Thess. 2.4).

The phrase "evenings and mornings" means evening and morning sacrifices, and refers to the time from the desecration of the altar in the Temple by Antiochus IV Epiphanes to the restoration of the Temple worship under Judas Maccabeus in 165 B.C.

That's why Dan. 8.14 says "The other replied, 'It will take twenty-three hundred evenings and mornings; then the Temple will be restored'." The year-day theory fails.

 

[3rdAngel]

@ 3rdAngel The phrase "evenings and mornings" means evening and morning sacrifices, and refers to the time from the desecration of the altar in the Temple by Antiochus IV Epiphanes to the restoration of the Temple worship under Judas Maccabeus in 165 B.C. That's why Dan. 8.14 says "The other replied, 'It will take twenty-three hundred evenings and mornings; then the Temple will be restored'." The year-day theory fails.

Soda all you have done is ignored my post to you showing why Antiochus Epiphanes is not the little horn of Daniel 8. How about you answer the 18+ objections raised earlier that show why Antiochus Epiphanes cannot be the little Horn of Daniel 8 if you disagree?

All your doing here is cutting and pasting info from other websites without addressing my earlier posts and objections showing why I believe these claims to be false. If you disagree with what I posted earlier please addrress my post # 960 linked showing why Antiochus Epiphanes does not fit the scripture prophecy of Daniel 8. If you cannot then perhaps it is you who is changing the meaning of the scriptures Soda.

What you have quoted does not link Antiochus Epiphanes to Danial 8 neither does Daniel 11. The 18+ points in the linked post above show why Antiochus Epiphanes cannot be the little horn of Daniel 8. If you disagree please address the post showing why your interpretation of the scripture is not correct. If your interpretation does not fit the scripture perfectly it is a faulty one. There is 18+ points in the linked post showing why application of the scriptures are in error that you simply ignored without response. I suggest you read them.

Also, you make a claim here that the prophetic year day principle do not apply in these scriptures yet they are consistently applied throughout Daniel's other prophecies for example in Daniel 9:24-27 which gives the begining of the time set for the rebuilding of Jerusalem to the Messiah and the 2300 day/year prophecy. This proves your application of the scriptures here to literal days are in error. You can't have it both ways.

Did you want to have a discussion with my about this topic? I am happy to but you will want to know your stuff inside out. You won't be able to have a discussion with me if you do not know the scriptures and you simply cut and paste other peoples opinions from other websites. How about you start your own thread up and pm the link?

 

[Ebionite]

Because the scriptures say that all scripture is given by inspiration of God. We believe this by faith.

This is classic circular reasoning.

The Bible did not exist at the time that your verse about inspiration was written, so your faith has to include faith in those who selected the books of the Bible, even though the Bible refers to other books eg Jasher which are not part of the canon. This problem is compounded by the fact that different Christian denominations have different canons.

 

[sooda]

No meaning has been changed your simply providing a false interpretation of the scriptures here. Which has already been addressed in another thread showing why Antiochus cannot be the little horn of Danial 8.

The little horn of Daniel 8 does not symbolize Antiochus Epiphanes, but it does symbolize Rome. To prove this is easy. If people would only treat interpretations of prophecy as they treat bank-bills, that is, compare them with the detector to see if they are genuine, there would be no trouble. Our only wonder is that any one could ever have supposed the application to Antiochus to be genuine.

Why do I say the above??? For very good reason. Please follow....

1. This horn came out of one of the four horns of the goat. Verse 9. It was therefore another horn separate and distinct from any of the four. One of these four horns, as we have seen, was the kingdom of Syria, founded by Seleucus, from whom sprung the famous line of kings known in history as the Seleucidae.

Of these there were twenty-six, in order as follows:- 1. Seleucus Nicator. 2. Antiochus Soter. 3. Antiochus Theus. 4. Seleucus Callinicus. 5. Seleucus Ceraunus. 6. Antiochus the Great. 7. Seleucus Philopater. 8. Antiochus Epiphanes. 9. Antiochus Eupator. 10. Demetrius Soter. 11. Alexander Bala. 12. Demetrius Nicator. 13. Antiochus Theos. 14. Antiochus Sidetes. 15. Zebia. 16. Seleucus, son of Nicator. 17. Antiochus Grypus. 18. Antiochus the Cyzicenian. 19. Seleucus, the son of Grypus. 20. Antiochus Eusebes. 21. Antiochus, second son of Grypus. 22. Philip, third son of Grypus. 23. Demetrius Eucheres. 24. Antiochus Dionysius. 25. Tigranes. 26. Antiochus Asiaticus, who was the last of the Seleucidae, and who, after an insignificant reign of four years, was driven from his dominions by Pompey, the Roman, B.C.

It will thus be seen that Antiochus Epiphanes was simply one of the twenty-six kings who constituted the Syrian horn of the goat. He was for the time being that horn; hence he could not be at the same time a separate and independent power, or another remarkable horn, as the little horn was. Rome was such a separate horn, and, from the stand-point of this prophecy, came out of one of the horns of the goat, thus answering exactly to the prophetic description. In the year 161 B.C., Rome became connected with the Jews by the famous Jewish League, 1 Mac. 8; Josephus' Antiq., b. xii., chap. x., sec. 6; Prideaux, vol. ii., p. 166. Nations are noticed in prophecy when they become connected with God's people. Right here the conquering legions of the Roman power came into the prophet's view. But just seven years before this, B.C. 168, Rome had conquered Macedonia (one of the four horns of the goat), adding it to its empire. And as if coming from that horn, the prophet beholds it from that point pursuing its triumphant career. It is therefore spoken of as coming forth from that horn.

2. Were we to apply the little horn to any one of these twenty-six Syrian kings, it should be to the most illustrious and powerful one of them all. But this was not Antiochus Epiphanes. For historians inform us that his name, Epiphanes, the illustrious, was changed to Epimanes, the fool, on account of his vile and extravagant folly. The little horn cannot apply to Antiochus, but must signify the Roman power, because,

3. This little horn, in comparison with the preceding kingdoms, Media and Persia, waxed "exceeding great." There is in the prophecy a regularly increasing gradation of power: great, very great, exceeding great. Applying the little horn to Antiochus, the following result is presented: 1. "Great," Persia. True. 2. "Very great," Grecia. True. 3. "Exceeding great," Antiochus. Nonsense.

The Persian empire is simply called "great," though it ruled "from India even unto Ethiopia, over an hundred and twenty and seven provinces." Grecia, still more extensive and powerful, is called "very great." Then comes the power in question, which is called "exceeding great."

Was Antiochus great in comparison with Alexander, who conquered the world? or with the Romans, who conquered vastly more than all of Alexander's dominions?? The kingdom of Antiochus was only a portion of the empire ruled by the goat. Is a part more than the whole? Of the relation between Antiochus and the Romans, the Religious Encyclopedia says: "Finding his resources exhausted, he [Antiochus] resolved to go into Persia to levy tributes and collect large sums which he had agreed to pay to the Romans."

Can any king be said to have waxed exceeding great, when he left his kingdom no larger than he found it? But Sir Isaac Newton testifies that Antiochus did not enlarge his dominions. He made some temporary conquests in Egypt, but immediately relinquished them when the Romans took the part of Ptolemy and commanded him to give them up. It surely cannot take any one long to decide which was the greater power, the one which evacuated Egypt or the one which commanded that evacuation; the one compelled to pay tribute, or the one to whom he was compelled to pay it.

One was Antiochus; the other was Rome. With Rome as the third member of the series, we have this result: 1. "Great," Persia. True. 2. "Very great," Grecia. True. 3. "Exceeding great," Rome. More emphatically true than either or both the others.

4. The little horn was to stand up against the Prince of princes, by which title, without doubt, our Lord is meant. But Antiochus died 164 years before Christ was born. There was a power, however, which did stand up against the Saviour. Rome was then in the zenith of its glory. And Rome, in the person of Herod, endeavored to destroy the infant Jesus. Subsequently, when Pilate was its mouth-piece in Judea, it nailed him to the cross. The same work is attributed to the great red dragon of Rev.12, a symbol referring so evidently to Rome that none care to dispute the application. Antiochus answers not one specification of the prophecy; and here we may
therefore dismiss him. But, for a more full elucidation of the prophecy, we may
further say of Rome:-

5. This horn was "little" at first. So was Rome, but it "waxed," or grew, "exceeding great" in three several directions. What better terms could be used to describe the course of that power which from a small beginning rose to be the mistress of the world?

6. It gathered dominion toward the south. Egypt was made a province of the Roman empire B.C. 30, and continued such for over six centuries.

7. It marched its conquering legions toward the east. Rome subjugated Syria B.C. 63, and made it a province of the empire.

8. It set its face toward the pleasant land. Judea is so called in many scriptures. Ps.106:24; Zech.7:14; etc. First by a league of assistance and friendship the Romans took under their influence the holy land and people. They subsequently made Judea a Roman province, and finally destroyed the city of Jerusalem, burned their beautiful temple with fire, and scattered the Jews over the face of the whole earth to be gathered no more till time shall end.

9. It waxed great even to the host of heaven. These terms, used in a symbolic sense in reference to earthly scenes, must denote persons of illustrious character or exalted position. The great red dragon, Rev.12:4, Pagan Rome, is said to have cast down a third part of the stars of heaven to the ground. This is the same power, and we think the same work, referring to its acts of oppressing the Jews and deposing their rulers.

10. By him the daily (not daily sacrifice, as our translators have supplied, but daily desolation, which is paganism) was taken away, and the transgression of desolation, the papacy, was set up.. Chap.11:31. Rome, and Rome alone, did this. While Rome was ruler, the religion of the empire was changed from paganism to that corrupted form of Christianity known as the papacy. And the place where paganism had long had its sanctuary, Rome with its Pantheon, or temple of all the gods, was cast down, or degraded to the second rank, by the removal of the seat of government to Constantinople, in A.D. 330. So in Rev.13:2, the dragon, Pagan Rome, gave to
the beast, Papal Rome, his seat, the city of Rome, and great authority.

11. An host was given him against the daily. The barbarians that subverted the Roman empire became converts to that nominal Christianity before which they were thus brought face to face, and were soon transformed into willing instruments whereby their former religion, paganism, was dethroned. No other power has in any respect fulfilled this prophecy.

12. In the interpretation, verse 23, it is called a king of fierce countenance and understanding dark sentences. Such was emphatically Rome, with its warlike paraphernalia, and its strange language which the Jews did not understand. Moses uses similar language, referring, as all agree, to the Romans. Deut. 28:49,50.

13. It was to stand up in the latter time of their kingdom, when the dominion of the four horns of the goat was drawing to an end. There Rome appeared.

14. It was to destroy wonderfully. Hear all opposing powers, which it so rudely overthrew, testify, Thus did Rome.

15. Rome has destroyed the mighty and holy people, the people of God, more than all other powers combined. A many-tongued voice from the blood of more than fifty millions of martyrs, goes up to testify against it. 16. And it has "practiced,"-practiced its deceptions upon the people, and its schemes of cunning among the nations, to gain its own ends, and aggrandize its
power.

17. And it has "prospered." It has made war with the saints, and worn them out and prevailed against them.

18. It has run its allotted career, and is to be "broken without hand." Verse 25. How clear a reference to the stone cut out without hand which is to smite the image upon its feet and dash it to pieces. So the papacy is soon to perish in the consuming glories of the second coming of our Lord. Thus Rome fulfills all the specifications of the prophecy. No other kingdom meets even one. Rome is the power in question. No other can be.

In view of all these facts, if any one still affirms that Antiochus was the little horn, or if he even hesitates to admit its application to Rome, all we can do is to take such person by the hand, and exclaim, with the deepest commiseration for his unfortunate condition,

"Non compos mentis. Farewell."

The Romans didn't take control of Palestine until 63 BC.

Palestine was a province of Syria in 500 BC according to Herodotus.

Who are the 50 million you are talking about?

The Prince to come is Titus and those who destroy the city and the Temple are his people.

 

[3rdAngel]

The Romans didn't take control of Palestine until 63 BC.

Palestine was a province of Syria in 500 BC according to Herodotus.

Who are the 50 million you are talking about?

The Prince to come is Titus and those who destroy the city and the Temple are his people.

50 Million is in reference to pagan and papal Romes persecution of the christian martys.

 

[sojourner]

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness *2 TIMOTHY 3:16 - Faith

All which scripture? Which canon (there are several legit canons)? Or are we only considering the scripture that the writer of Timothy knew and classified as scripture? And how are you interpreting “profitable?” Do you interpret it as “useful?” Or as “necessary?” You realize, of course, that the early Xtians didn’t have access to all the texts, and that their faith was informed more by oral teaching?

it seems your view doesn’t match that of early Xtians.

 

[3rdAngel]

This is classic circular reasoning.

The Bible did not exist at the time that your verse about inspiration was written, so your faith has to include faith in those who selected the books of the Bible, even though the Bible refers to other books eg Jasher which are not part of the canon. This problem is compounded by the fact that different Christian denominations have different canons.

Do you not think God, the creator of heaven and earth is not in control of his Word?

 

[sojourner]

50 Million is in reference to pagan and papal Romes persecution of the christian martys.

Wait... when did “Papal Rome” persecute Xtians? Are you speaking of heretics (which are not considered Xtians), or Protestants (which, likewise, were considered heretic)? Those considered “martyrs” weren’t heretical.

 

[3rdAngel]

All which scripture? Which canon (there are several legit canons)? Or are we only considering the scripture that the writer of Timothy knew and classified as scripture? And how are you interpreting “profitable?” Do you interpret it as “useful?” Or as “necessary?” You realize, of course, that the early Xtians didn’t have access to all the texts, and that their faith was informed more by oral teaching?

it seems your view doesn’t match that of early Xtians.

Everything is just how God made it to be. Indeed it is just as the scriptures teach. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God. Though today we have the written word of God.

 

[3rdAngel]

Wait... when did “Papal Rome” persecute Xtians? Are you speaking of heretics (which are not considered Xtians), or Protestants (which, likewise, were considered heretic)? Those considered “martyrs” weren’t heretical.

Sooo you went to seminary school and you do not know this?

 

[sojourner]

Do you not think God, the creator of heaven and earth is not in control of his Word?

No, just as Gos is not “in control” of God’s people, or what they choose to write. That’s not typically How Gos Works.

 

[3rdAngel]

No, just as Gos is not “in control” of God’s people, or what they choose to write. That’s not typically How Gos Works.

I see. Ok I guess you have your faith and I have mine. Although mine tells me no one has God's salvation if they do not believe and follow God's Word. Good luck with yours. Your going to need it if you believe the scriptures *JOHN 12:47-48