APOSTLE PAUL AND THE SABBATH?

Paul and the SABBATH?

Did he "do away" with it?

From the book "The Sabbath Under Crossfire" by Dr. Samuele Bacciocchi Ph.D. Chapter 6  PAUL AND THE SABBATH

The most popular weapons used to attack the Sabbath are the

following three Pauline texts: Colossians 2:14-17, Galatians

4:8-11, and Romans 10:4-5. Of these references, greater

importance has been attached to Colossians 2:14-17, inasmuch as

the passage explicitly speaks of Christ's nailing something to

the Cross (Col 2:14) and warns against paying heed to regulations

regarding several things, including "a sabbath" (Col 2:16).

Based on these texts, the predominant historical consensus has

been that Paul regarded the Sabbath as part of the Old Covenant

that was nailed to the Cross.1 

     Paul K. Jewett exemplifies the historical interpretation

when he writes: "Paul's statement (Col 2:16) comes as near to a

demonstration as anything could, that he taught his converts they

had no obligation to observe the seventh-day Sabbath of the Old

Testament." 2

     This popular view has been adopted and defended recently by

former Sabbatarians. For example, commenting on Colossians

2:16-17, the Worldwide Church of God affirms: "Under the laws of

Moses, the Sabbathwas a law by which people were judged. But

Jesus' crucifixion has changed that. Now the Sabbath is no longer

a basis for judgment." 3

     The implication is that Christians are no longer held

accountable for transgressing the Sabbath commandment because it

was a ""shadow' of things to come."4

     In "Sabbath in Crisis," Dale Ratzlaff categorically affirms:

"In every instance in the epistles [of Paul] where there is

teaching about the Sabbath, that teaching suggests that the

Sabbath either undermines the Christian's standing in Christ, or

is nonessential ... The Sabbath is said to be enslaving.

Observance of the Sabbath, and the related old covenant

convocations, made Paul `fear' that he had labored in vain." 5

     Ratzlaff goes so far as to say that, according to Paul, "the

observance of the Sabbath by Christians seriously undermines the

finished work of Christ." 6

     Did Paul take such a strong stand against the Sabbath,

warning his converts against the detrimental effects of its

observance in their Christian life? Did the Apostle really find

Sabbathkeeping so dangerous? In what way could the act of

stopping our work on the Sabbath to allow our Savior to work in

our lives more fully and freely "seriously undermine the finished

work of Christ"?

Objectives of This Chapter

     This chapter seeks to answer these questions by examining

Paul's attitude toward the Sabbath as reflected primarily in

Colossians 2:14-17 and secondarily in Galatians 4:8-11 and Romans

14:5-6. We endeavor to establish whether Paul advocated the

abrogation or the permanence of the principle and practice of

Sabbathkeeping.

PART 1 

COLOSSIANS 2:14-17: APPROBATION OR 

CONDEMNATION OF THE SABBATH?

(1) The Colossian Heresy

     Paul's reference to the observance of "Sabbaths" in

Colossians 2:16 is only one aspect of the "Colossian heresy"

refuted by Paul. It is necessary, therefore, to ascertain first

of all the overall nature of the false teachings that threatened

to "disqualify" (Col 2:18) the Colossian believers. Were these

teachings Mosaic ordinances and can they be identified with the

"written document-cheirographon" which God through Christ 

`wiped out ... removed, nailed to the cross" (Col 2:14)?

     Most commentators define the Colossian heresy as

syncretistic teachings which incorporated both Hellenistic and

Jewish elements. Such a false teaching had both a theological 

and practical aspect.

Theological Aspect

     Theologically, the Colossian "philosophy" (Col 2:8) was

competing with Christ for believer's allegiance. Its source of

authority was human "tradition" (Col 2:8), and its object was to

impart true "wisdom" (Co1 2:3,23), "knowledge" (Col 2:2-3; 3:10)

and the assurance access to and participation in the divine

"fullness" (Col 2:9-10; 1:19).

     To attain divine fullness, Christians were urged to do

homage to cosmic principalities (Col 2:10,15), to "the elements

of the universe" (Col 2:8, 20), and to angelic powers (2:15,18),

following ritualistic ascetic practices (Col 2:11-14,16,17,

21-22).

     To gain protection from these cosmic powers and

principalities, the Colossian "philosophers" urged Christians to

offer cultic adoration to angelic powers (Col 2:15,18,19,23) and

to follow ritualistic and ascetic practices (Col 2:11,14,16,

17,21,22). By that process, one was assured of access to and

participation in the divine "fullness pleroma" (Col 2:9,10, cf.

1:19). Essentially, then, the theological error consisted in

interposing inferior mediators in place of the Head Himself,

Jesus Christ (Col 2:9-10,18-19).

Practical Aspect

     The practical outcome of the theological speculations of the

Colossian heretics was their insistence on strict ascetism and

ritualism. These consisted in "putting off the body of flesh"

(Col 2:11 - apparently meaning withdrawal from the world);

rigorous treatment of the body (Col 2:23); prohibition to either

taste or touch certain kinds of foods and beverages (Col

2:16,21), and careful observance of sacred days and

seasons-festival, new moon, Sabbath (Col 2:16).

     Christians presumably were led to believe that by submitting

to these ascetic practices, they were not surrendering their

faith in Christ but rather, they were receiving added protection

and were assured of full access to the divine fullness. This may

be inferred both from Paul's distinction between living

"according to the elements of the universe" and "according to

Christ" (Col 2:8) and from the Apostle's insistence on the

supremacy of the incarnate Christ. "In him the whole fullness of

deity dwells bodily" (Col 2:9); therefore Christians attain "the

fullnesspleroma" of life not by worshipping the elements of the

universe, but through Christ, "who is the head of all rule and

authority" (2:10; cf. 1:15-20; 3:3).

     This bare outline suffices to show that the Sabbath is not

mentioned in the passage in the context of a direct discussion of

the Old Covenant law, as Ratzlaff claims,' but rather in the

context of syncretistic beliefs and practices, which included

elements from the Old Testament. Presumably the latter provided a

justification for the ascetic principles advocated by the

Colossian "philosophers." We are not informed what type of

Sabbath observance these teachers promoted; nevertheless, on the

basis of their emphasis on scrupulous adherence to "regulations,"

it is apparent that the day was to be observed in a most rigorous

and superstitious manner.

Circumcision and Baptism

     To combat the above false teachings, Paul chose to extol the

centrality and superiority of Christ who possesses "the fullness

of deity" (Col 2:9) and provides full redemption and forgiveness

of sin (Col 2:11-14). To emphasize the certainty and fullness of

Christ's forgiveness, Paul utilizes three metaphors:

circumcision, baptism, and "the written document" (Col 2:11-14).

     Of the first two metaphors, Paul says: "In him also you were

circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting

off the body of flesh in the circumcision of Christ; and you were

buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with

him through faith in the working of God, who raised him from the

dead. And you, who were dead in trespasses and the uncircumcision

of the flesh, God has made alive together with him, having

forgiven us all our trespasses" (Col 2:11-13).

     To support his contention that the Sabbath is part of the

Old Covenant nailed to the Cross, Ratzlaff interprets Paul's

reference to the circumcision and baptism in this passage as

indicating that the Old Covenant, of which circumcision was the

entrance sign, has been replaced by the New Covenant, of which

baptism is the entrance sign. "Circumcision not only served as

the entrance sign to the old covenant, Paul shows how it also

pointed forward to Christ, yet it does not continue as a sign in

the new covenant. In the new covenant baptism replaces

circumcision." 8

     The problem with Ratzlaff's interpretation is his failure to

recognize that Paul is not comparing or contrasting the Old and

New Covenants, but affirming the benefits of Christ's death and

resurrection through the imageries of circumcision and baptism.

The imageries of circumcision and baptism are not used by Paul to

discuss the Old and New Covenants, but to affirm the fullness of

God's forgiveness, accomplished by Christ on the cross and

extended through baptism to the Christian. Indeed, the

proclamation of God's forgiveness constitutes Paul's basic answer

to those attempting perfection by submitting to worship of angels

(Col 2:18) and of the "elements of the world" (Col 2:8) by means

of ascetic practices.

(2) The Written Document Nailed to the Cross

     To further emphasize the certainty and fullness of divine

forgiveness explicitly mentioned in verses 11-13, Paul utilizes a

legal metaphor in verse 14, namely that of God as a judge who

"wiped out.... removed [and] nailed to the cross ... the written

document-cheirographon."

Mosaic Law? 

     What is the "written document - - cheirographon" nailed to

the Cross? Traditionally, it has been interpreted to be the

Mosaic Law with all its ordinances, including the Sabbath, which

God allegedly set aside and nailed to the Cross. This

interpretation is defended by Ratzlaff who writes: "What was the

`certificate of debt' or 'decrees' which were nailed to the

cross? In context, Paul has been speaking of the old covenant.

Was the old covenant 'against us'? We should remember from our

study of the old covenant that one of its functions was to act as

a 'testimony' against Israel if they sinned ... (Deut 31:26). The

cursing associated with the broken law and the ability of the law

to condemn were both taken away when Christ was nailed to the

Cross. 'There is therefore no condemnation for those who are in

Christ Jesus' (Rom 8:1)." 9

     This interpretation has several serious problems. First, the

wrong assumption is made that the Old Covenant was "against us."

If that were true, God would be guilty of establishing a covenant

that was against His people. Could a gracious, redeeming God do

such an unjust thing? What was against the people was not the

covenant, which is God's commitment to save, but their sins which

were exposed by the Law. The reason there is "no condemnation for

those who are in Christ Jesus" (Rom 8:1) is not because Christ

nailed to the Cross "the ability of the law to condemn," thus

leaving mankind without moral principles, but because God sent

"his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh ... in order that

the just requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who

walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit" (Rom

8:3-4).

     Even more serious is Ratzlaff's misinterpretation of the

"written document" that was nailed to the Cross. He interprets

this document to be the Old Covenant including the Sabbath, which

God allegedly set aside and nailed to the Cross." 10 

     This popular and traditional interpretation has largely been

discredited by modern scholarship for at least two reasons.

First, as Eduard Lobse points out in his commentary on

Colossians, "in the whole of the epistle the word law is not used

at all. Not only that, but the whole significance of the law,

which appears unavoidable for Paul when he presents his gospel,

is completely absent." 11

     Second, this interpretation detracts from the immediate

argument designed to prove the fullness of God's forgiveness. The

wiping out of the moral and/or ceremonial law would hardly

provide Christians with the divine assurance of forgiveness.

Guilt is not removed by destroying law codes. The latter would

only leave mankind without moral principles. The validity of

these comments is acknowledged even by Douglas R. De Lacey,

Professor of New Testament at Cambridge University and

contributor to the scholarly symposium From Sabbath to the Lord's

Day, which is largely a response to my dissertation From Sabbath

to Sunday. De Lacey writes: "Bacchiocchi lays great stress on the

fact that the term nomos [law] is entirely absent from

Colossians, and although his own interpretation at times fails to

convince, he is surely right in his conclusion that this passage

cannot be interpreted as stating that the Mosaic law itself was

'wiped out' in the death of Christ." 12

Record Book of Sin

     The meaning of "cheirographon," which occurs only once in

Scripture (Col 2:14), has been clarified by recent studies on the

usage of the term in apocalyptic and rabbinic literature. 13

     The term is used to denote the "record book of sins" or a

"certificate of sin in debtedness" but not the moral or ceremonial

law. This view is supported also by the clause "and this he has

removed out of the middle" (Col 2:14). "The middle" was the

position occupied at the center of the court or assembly by the

accusing witness. In the context of Colossians, the accusing

witness is the "record book of sins" which God in Christ has

erased and removed out of the court.

     By this daring metaphor, Paul affirms the completeness of

God's forgiveness. Through Christ, God has "cancelled," "set

aside," and "nailed to the cross" "the written record of our sins

which because of the regulations was against us." The legal basis

of the record of sins was "the binding statutes," or

"regulations" (tois dogmasin), but what God destroyed on the

Cross was not the legal ground (law) for our entanglement into

sin, but the written record of our sins.

     By destroying the evidence of our sins, God also "disarmed

the principalities and powers" (Col 2:15) since it is no longer

possible for them to accuse those who have been forgiven. There

is no reason, therefore, for Christians to feel incomplete and to

seek the help of inferior mediators since Christ has provided

complete redemption and forgiveness.

     We conclude, then, that the document nailed to the Cross is

not the Law, in general, or the Sabbath, in particular, but

rather the record of our sins. Any attempt to read into this text

a reference to the Law or the Sabbath lacks contextual and

linguistic support.

(3) Approbation or Condemnation of Sabbathkeeping?

     Having refuted the theological speculations of the Colossian

false teachers by reaffirming the supremacy of Christ and the

fullness of His redemption (Col 2:8-15), Paul turns to some

practical aspects of their -religious practices, saying:

"Therefore, let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food

and drink or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a

sabbath. These are only a shadow of what is to come; but the

substance belongs to Christ" (Col 2:16-17).

Warning Against the Sabbath? 

     Historically, this passage has been interpreted, as stated

by Luther, that "here Paul abolished the Sabbath by name and

called it a bygone shadow because the body, which is Christ

himself, has come." 14 

     Ratzlaff interprets the passage along the same line, saying:

"The context makes it clear that Paul is against those who are

trying to force the Colossians to keep the Sabbath and other old

covenant convocations. They are to allow no one to make them 

feel guilty for not observing them." 15

     He interprets the statement "Therefore, let no one pass

judgment on you . . ." as a warning from Paul against the five

mentioned practices, which include the Sabbath. 16

     This interpretation is wrong because in this passage Paul

warns the Colossians not against the observances of these

practices as such, but against "anyone" (tis) who passes judgment

on how to eat, to drink, and to observe sacred times. The judge

who passed judgment is not Paul but the Colossians false teachers

who imposed "regulations" (Col 2:20) on how to observe these

practices in order to achieve "rigor of devotion and self-abasement 

and severity to the body" (Col 2:23).

     Douglas De Lacey, a contributor to the scholarly symposium

From Sabbath to the Lord's Day cited earlier, rightly comments:

"The judge is likely to be a man of ascetic tendencies who

objects to the Colossians' eating and drinking. The most natural

way of taking the rest of the passage is not that he also imposes

a ritual of feast days, but rather that he objects to certain

elements of such observation." 17

     Presumably the "judge" wanted the community to observe these

practices in a more ascetic way ("severity to the body"-Col 2:23,

21); to put it bluntly, he wanted the Colossian believers to do

less feasting and more fasting.

Approbation of the Sabbath

     By warning against the right of the false teachers to "pass

judgment" on how to observe festivals, Paul is challenging not

the validity of the festivals as such but the authority of the

false teachers to legislate the manner of their observance. The

obvious implication, then, is that Paul in this text is

expressing not a condemnation but an approbation of the mentioned

practices, which include Sabbathkeeping.

     It is noteworthy that even De Lacey reaches this conclusion,

in spite of his view that Paul did not expect Gentile converts to

observe the Sabbath. He writes: "Here again (Col 2:16), then, it

seems that Paul could happily countenance Sabbathkeeping ....

However, we interpret the situation, Paul's statement `Let no one

pass judgement on you,' indicates that no stringent regulations

are to be laid down over the use of festivals." 18

     Troy Martin, Professor at Saint Xavier University in

Chicago, comes to the same conclusion in a recent article

published in New Testament Studies. He writes: "This essay

provides evidence that the Pauline community at Colossae, not the

opponents, practices the temporal schemes outlined by Colossians

2:16.... This investigation into the function of the list in

Colossians 2:16 indicates that the Colossians Christians, not

their critics, participate in a religious calendar that includes

festivals, new moons, and Sabbaths." 19

     It is encouraging to see scholars finally recognizing that,

contrary to the traditional and popular interpretation advocated

by people like Ratzlaff, Colossians 2:16 is not the death knell

of Sabbathkeeping in the New Testament but, instead, a proof of

its Pauline approbation. Why does Ratzlaff totally ignore the

conclusion of Prof. De Lacey (and others), though he uses the

symposium as the major resource for his own book? Most likely

because he does not want readers to learn about anything that

contradicts his anti-Sabbath interpretation of Colossians 2:16.

This methodology is hardly reflective of responsible scholarship

which requires the examination of opposing views before

presenting one's own conclusions.

(4) The Manner of Sabbathkeeping

     What is the nature of the "regulations" promoted by the

Colossians false teachers regarding food and festivals, including

the weekly Sabbath? Regretfully, Paul gives us only few catch

phrases such as "self-abasement and worship of angels," "rigor of

devotion ... severity to the body" (Col 2:18, 23) and their

teachings-"Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch" (Co1 2:21).

These catch phrases indicate that the regulations did not derive

from the Levitical law since nowhere does the latter contemplate

such an ascetic program. Though the designation of the festivals

is Jewish, the motivation and manner of their observance stems

from pagan syncretistic ideologies.

     Eduard Lohse perceptively notes that "In the context of

Colossians, the command to keep festival, new moon, and Sabbath

is not based on the Torah according to which Israel received the

Sabbath as a sign of her election from among the nations. Rather

the sacred days must be kept for the sake of 'the elements of the

universe' who direct the course of the stars and also prescribe

minutely the order of the calendar ... The 'philosophy' made use

of terms which stemmed from Jewish tradition, but which had been

transformed in the crucible of syncretism to be subject to the

service of `the elements of the universe." 20

     In the ancient world there was widespread belief that

ascetism and fasting enabled a person to come closer to a deity

and to receive divine revelation. 21 

     In the case of the Colossian "philosophy," the dietary

taboos and the observance of sacred times were apparently

regarded as an expression of subjection to and worship of the

cosmic powers (elements) of the universe.

     Paul's warning against the "regulations" of the false

teachers cannot be interpreted as a condemnation of Mosaic laws

regarding food and festivals, since what the Apostle condemns is

not the teachings of Moses but their perverted use by Colossian

false teachers. A precept is not nullified by the condemnation of

its perversion.

Shadow of the Reality

     Paul continues his argument in the following verse, saying:

"These are the shadow of what is to come; but the substance

belongs to Christ" (Col 2:17). To what does the relative pronoun

"these" (ha in Greek) refer? Does it refer to the five practices

mentioned in the previous verse or to the "regulations" (dogmata)

regarding these practices promoted by the false teachers?

In a previous study, I argued for the former, suggesting that

Paul places dietary practices and the observance of days "in

their proper perspective with Christ by means of the contrast

'shadow-body.'" 22 

     Additional reflection caused me to change my mind and to

agree with Eduard Lohse that the relative pronoun "these" refers

not to the five mentioned practices as such, but rather to the

"regulations" regarding such practices promoted by the false

teachers. 23

A Reference to “Regulations”

     This conclusion is supported by two considerations. First,

in verse 16, Paul is not warning against the merits or demerits

of the Mosaic law regarding food and festivals, but against the

"regulations" regarding these practices advocated by the false

teachers. Thus, it is more plausible to take "the regulations"

rather than the actual practices as the antecedent of "these."

     Second, in the verses that immediately follow, Paul

continues his warning against the deceptive teachings, saying,

for example, "Let no one disqualify you, insisting on

self-abasement..." (Col 2:18); "Why do you submit to regulations,

'Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch'?" (Col 2:20-21).

Since what precedes and what follows that relative pronoun

"these" deals with the "regulations" of the Colossian

"philosophy," it is most likely that Paul describes the latter as

"a shadow of what is to come" (Col 2:17).

     The proponents of the Colossian "philosophy" presumably

maintained that their "regulations" represented a copy which

enabled the believer to have access to the reality ("fullness").

In such a case, Paul is turning their argument against them by

saying that their regulations "are only a shadow of what is to

come; but the substance belongs to Christ" (Col 2:17). By

emphasizing that Christ is the "body" and the "head" (Col 2:17,

19), Paul indicates that any "shadow" cast by the regulations has

no significant value.

     In the light of the above indications, we conclude that what

Paul calls a "bygone shadow" is not the Sabbath but the deceptive

teachings of the Colossian "philosophy" which promoted dietary

practices and the observance of sacred times as auxiliary aids to

salvation.

(5) The Sabbath in Colossians 2:16

     The "regulations" advocated by the Colossian "philosophy"

had to do not only with "food and drink" but also with sacred

times referred to as "a festival or a new moon or a sabbath" (Col

2:16). Commentators agree that these three words represent a

logical and progressive sequence (annual, monthly, and weekly),

as well as an exhaustive enumeration of sacred times. This

interpretation is validated by the occurrence of these terms in

similar or reverse sequence five times in the Septuagint and

several other times.in other literature. 24

     Some view the "sabbaths---sabbaton" as a reference to annual

ceremonial Sabbaths rather than the weekly Sabbath (Lev 23:6-8,

21,24-25,27-28,37-38).25 Such a view, however, breaks the logical

and progressive sequence and ignores the fact that in the

Septuagint the annual ceremonial Sabbaths are never designated

simply as "sabbath" (sabbaton), but always with the compound

expression "Sabbath of Sabbaths" (sabbata sabbaton). Indications

such as these compellingly show that the word "sabbaton" used in

Colossians 2:16 cannot refer to any of the annual ceremonial

Sabbaths.

Weekdays

     The plural form "Sabbaths" (sabbaton) is used in Scripture

to designate not only the seventh-day Sabbath but also the week

as a whole (Greek Septuagint on Ps 23:1; 47:1; 93:1; Mark 16:2;

Luke 24:1; Acts 20:7). This fact suggests the possibility that

the term "Sabbath" may refer to weekdays as a whole. 26 

     The latter view harmonizes better with the sequence of the

enumeration which suggests yearly, monthly, and weekly

festivities.

     A similar sequence, though in reverse order, is given by

Paul in Galatians 4:10 where he opposes a strikingly similar

teaching which included the observance of "days, and months, and

seasons, and years." The fact that the Galatian list begins with

"days" (hemeras, plural) suggests the possibility that the

"Sabbaths" in Colossians may also refer to weekdays, in general,

rather than to the seventh-day Sabbath, in particular.

     Assuming for the sake of inquiry that the "sabbaths" in

Colossians do refer to or include the Sabbath day, the question

to be considered is this: What kind of Sabbath observance would

the false teachers advocate? The data provided by Colossians are

too meager to answer this question conclusively. Yet the nature

of the heresy allows us to conclude that the rigoristic emphasis

on observance of dietary rules would undoubtedly be carried over

to Sabbathkeeping as well. The veneration of "the elements of the

universe" would also affect the observance of the Sabbath and of

sacred times, since it was commonly believed that the astral

powers, which direct the stars, control both the calendar and

human lives. 27

     We know that in the pagan world Saturday was regarded as an

unlucky day because of its association with the planet Saturn. 28

In view of the prevailing astral superstitions associated with

the days of the week, any Sabbath observance promoted by the

Colossians' ascetic teachersknown for their worship of the

elements of the world-could only have been of a rigorous,

superstitious type. A warning against such a superstitious type

of Sabbathkeeping by Paul would have been not only appropriate

but also desirable. In this case, Paul could be attacking not the

principle of Sabbathkeeping but its perverted function and

motivation which adulterated the ground of salvation. This

conclusion is confirmed by two other Pauline passages (Rom

14:4-5; Gal 4:10) to be considered now.

PART 2 

THE SABBATH IN ROMANS AND GALATIANS

(1) The Sabbath in Romans

     The Sabbath is not specifically mentioned in Paul's Epistle

to the Romans. However, in chapter 14, the Apostle distinguishes

between two types of believers: the "strong" who believed "he may

eat anything" and the "weak" who ate only "vegetables" and drank

no wine (Rom 14:2, 21). The difference extended also to the

observance of days, as indicated by Paul's statement: "One man

esteems one day as better than another, while another man esteems

all days alike. Let every one be fully convinced in his own mind"

(Rom 14:5).

     Many Christians maintain that the weekly Sabbath comes

within the scope of this distinction respecting days. They

presume that the "weak" believers esteemed the Sabbath better

than other days while "the strong" treated the Sabbath like the

rest of the weekdays. For example, the Worldwide Church of God

uses Romans 14:5 to argue that "Paul did not teach Gentile

Christians to keep the Sabbath. He actually told them that the

Sabbath was not an area in which we should be judged." 29 "That

is because something had happened to change the basis of our

relationship with God ... the crucifixion and resurrection of

Jesus Christ. Because of that, the Old Covenant laws came to an

end. Days are no longer a matter for judging behavior." 30 In a

similar vein, Ratzlaff concludes that "The `days' mentioned in

this chapter [Rom 14:5] that some `regard' and `observe' over

other days, are probably Sabbath days, although the evidence is

not conclusive." 31

No Reference to Mosaic Law

     Can the Sabbath be legitimately read into this passage? The

answer is "No!" for at least three reasons. First, the conflict

between the "weak" and the "strong" over diet and days cannot be

traced back to the Mosaic law. The "weak man" who "eats only

vegetables" (Rom 14:2), drinks no wine (Rom 14:21), and "esteems

one day as better [apparently for fasting] than another" (Rom

14:5) can claim no support for such convictions from the Old

Testament. Nowhere does the Mosaic law prescribe strict

vegetarianism, total abstinence from fermented and unfermented

wine, 32 and a preference for fasting days.

     Similarly, the "strong man" who "believes he may eat

anything" (Rom 14:2) and who "esteems all days alike" is not

asserting his freedom from the Mosaic law but from ascetic

beliefs apparently derived from sectarian movements. The whole

discussion then is not about freedom to observe the law versus

freedom from its observance, but concerns "unessential" scruples

of conscience dictated not by divine precepts but by human

conventions and superstitions. Since these differing convictions

and practices did not undermine the essence of the Gospel, Paul

advises mutual tolerance and respect in this matter.

     That the Mosaic law is not at stake in Romans 14 is also

indicated by the term "koinos---common" which is used in verse 14

to designate "unclean" food. This term is radically different

from the word "akathartos impure" used in Leviticus 11

(Septuagint) to designate unlawful foods. This suggests that the

dispute was not over meat which was unlawful according to the

Mosaic Law, but about meat which per se was lawful to eat but

because of its association with idol worship (cf. 1 Cor 8:1-13)

was regarded by some as "koinos---common," that is, to be avoided

by Christians.

     A second point to note is that Paul applies the basic

principle "observe it in honor of the Lord" (Rom 14:6) only to

the case of the person "who observes the day." He never says the

opposite, namely, "the man who esteems all days alike, esteems

them in honor of the Lord." In other words, with regard to diet,

Paul teaches that one can honor the Lord both by eating and by

abstaining (Rom 14:6); but with regard to days, he does not even

concede that the person who regards all the days alike does so to

the Lord. Thus, Paul hardly gives his endorsement to those who

esteemed all days alike.

Sabbathkeeping: For "Weak" Believers? 

     Finally, if as generally presumed, it was the "weak"

believer who observed the Sabbath, Paul would classify himself

with the "weak" since he observed the Sabbath and other Jewish

feasts (Acts 18:4,19; 17:1,10,17; 20:16). Paul, however, views

himself as "strong" ("we who are strong" - Rom 15:1); thus, he

could not have been thinking of Sabbathkeeping when he speaks 

of the preference over days.

     Support for this conclusion is also provided by Paul's

advice: "Let every one be fully convinced in his own mind" (Rom

14:5). It is difficult to see how Paul could reduce the observance 

of holy days such as the Sabbath, Passover, and Pentecost to a 

matter of personal conviction without ever explaining the reason for it. 

This is especially surprising since he labors at great length to explain 

why circumcision was not binding upon the Gentiles.

     If Paul taught his Gentile converts to regard Sabbathkeeping

as a personal matter, Jewish Christians readily would have

attacked his temerity in setting aside the Sabbath law, as they

did regarding circumcision (Acts 21:21). The fact that there is

no hint of any such controversy in the New Testament indicates

that Paul never discouraged Sabbathkeeping or encouraged

Sundaykeeping instead. 33

No Hint of Conflict

     The preference over days in Romans presumably had to do 

with fast days rather than feast days, since the context deals with

abstinence from meat and wine (Rom 14:2,6,21). Support for this

view is provided by the Didache (ch. 8) which enjoins Christians

to fast on Wednesday and Friday rather than on Monday and

Thursday like the Jews.

     Paul refuses to deliberate on private matters such as

fasting, because he recognizes that spiritual exercises can be

performed in different ways by different people. The important

thing for Paul is to "pursue what makes for peace and for mutual

upbuilding" (Rom 14:19).

     If the conflict in the Roman Church had been over the

observance of holy days, the problem would have been even more

manifest than the one over diet.   After all, eating habits are a

private matter, but Sabbath keeping is a public, religious

exercise of the whole community. Any disagreement on the latter

would have been not only noticeable but also inflammatory.

The fact that Paul devotes 21 verses to the discussion of food

and less than two verses (Rom 14:5-6) to that of days suggests

that the latter was a very limited problem for the Roman Church,

presumably because it had to do with private conviction on the

merit or demerit of doing certain spiritual exercises such as

fasting on some specific days.

     In the Roman world there was a superstitious belief that

certain days were more favorable than others for undertaking some

specific projects. The Fathers frequently rebuked Christians for

adopting such a superstitious mentality. 34 Possibly, Paul

alludes to this kind of problem, which at his time was still too

small to deserve much attention. Since these practices did not

undermine the essence of the Gospel, Paul advises mutual

tolerance and respect on this matter. In the light of these

considerations, we conclude that it is hardly possible that

Sabbathkeeping is included in the "days" of Romans 14:5.

(2) The Sabbath in Galatians

     In Galatians, as in Romans, there is no specific reference

to the Sabbath. Paul does mention, however, that some Galatian

Christians had themselves circumcised (Gal 6:12; 5:2) and had

begun to "observe days, and months, and seasons, and years" (Gal

4:10).

     In many respects, the polemic in Galatians 4:8-11 is

strikingly similar to that of Colossians 2:8-23. In both places

the superstitious observance of sacred times is described as

slavery to the "elements." In Galatians, however, the

denunciation of the "false teachers" is stronger. They are

regarded as "accursed" (Gal 1:8, 9) because they were teaching a

"different gospel." Their teaching that the observance of days

and seasons was necessary to justification and salvation

perverted the very heart of the Gospel (Gal 5:4).

Pagan Days or Sabbath Day? 

     The question to be addressed is whether the "days"

(hemerai---Gal 4:10) observed by the Galatians were superstitious

pagan holidays or the biblical Sabbath day. Some scholars argue

on the basis of the parallel passage of Colossians 2:16, where

"sabbaths" are explicitly mentioned, that the "days" mentioned in

Galatians were the Biblical seventh-day Sabbaths. 35

     Ratzlaff affirms categorically this view saying: "We have a

clear reference to the seventh-day Sabbath in this passage [Gal

4:10] for the following four reasons. (1) The context of the book

of Galatians, including chapter 4, is dealing with those 'who

want to be under the law.' (2) Paul's use of 'elemental things'

usually, if not always, refer to that which is contained in the

old covenant. (3) The Galatians were observing days, months,

seasons, and years, thus placing themselves back under the old

covenant law. (4) These convocations are listed in order." 36

Comparison of Colossians 2:16 and Galatians 4:10

     The fundamental problem with Ratzlaff' s four reasons is

that they are based on gratuitous assumptions rather than on a

careful analysis of the context. In the immediate context, Paul

reminds the Galatians that in their preChristian days they "were

slaves to the elemental spirits of the universe" (Gal 4:3). The

"elemental spirits - stoikeia tou kosmou" have nothing to do with

the Old Covenant since the Mosaic Law was unknown to the

Corinthians in their pagan days. Most scholars interpret the

"elements" as the basic elements of this world, such as the

earth, water, air, and fire, or pagan astral gods who were

credited with controlling human destiny. 37 

     The context clearly indicates that Paul rebukes the

Galatians for turning back to their pagan days by reverting to

their pagan calendar. Thus, the issue is not their adoption of

Jewish Holy Days but their return to observing pagan

superstitious days. Paul makes this point rather clearly:

"Formerly, when you did not know God, you were in bondage to

beings that by nature are no gods; but now that you have come to

know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn back

again to the weak and beggarly elemental spirits, whose slaves

you want to be once more? You observe days, and months, and

seasons, and years! I am afraid that I have labored over you in

vain" (Gal 4:8-10).

     Two,recent articles by Troy Martin, published in New

Testament Studies and the Journal of Biblical Literature, make a

significant contribution to the understanding of the passage

under consideration. Martin points out that the time-keeping

scheme found in Galatians 4:10 ("days, and months, and seasons,

and years") is clearly different from that found in Colossians

2:16 ("a festival or a new moon or Sabbaths"). He shows that

while the list in Colossians 2:16 is unquestionably Jewish,

because the temporal categories of festival, new moon, and

Sabbaths are characteristic of the Jewish religious calendar, the

list in Galatians 4:10 of "days, and months, and seasons, and

years" "describes a pagan calendar unacceptable to Paul and his

communities." 38

     Martin reaches this conclusion by examining not only the

time structure of pagan calendars, 39  but especially the

immediate context where Paul condemns the Galatians' attempt to

return to their pagan practices (Gal 4:8-9) by reverting to the

use of their pagan calendar. "As the immediate context clearly

states, Paul is worried that he has labored for the Galatians in

vain since they have returned to their former pagan life as

evidenced by their renewed preconversion reckoning of time.

Because of its association with idolatry and false deities,

marking time according to this pagan scheme is tantamount to

rejecting Paul's Gospel and the one and only true God it

proclaims (Gal 4:8-9). Galatians 4:10, therefore, stipulates that

when the Galatians accepted Paul's Gospel with its aversion to

idolatry (Gal 4:8), they discarded their pagan method of

reckoning time ... A comparison of these lists demonstrates that

the Gentile conversion to Paul's gospel involves rejection of

idolatrous pagan temporal schemes in favor of the Jewish

liturgical calendar." 40

Gentiles' Adoption of Jewish Calendar

     Troy Martin's conclusion, that the Gentiles' conversion to

the Gospel involved the rejection of their pagan calendar built

upon the idolatrous worship of many gods and the adoption of the

Jewish religious calendar which had been transformed by Christ's

coming, represents in my view a significant breakthrough in our

understanding of the continuity between Judaism and Christianity.

Paul's time references clearly reflect his adoption of the Jewish

religious calendar, though modified and transformed by the coming

of Christ. For example, in 1 Corinthians 16:2, Paul recommends a

fund raising plan for the Jerusalem church consisting of laying

aside at home some money kata mian sabbaton, that is, "every

first day from the Sabbath." The fact that Paul refers to the

first day of the week by the Jewish designation "first day from

the Sabbath," and not by the prevailing pagan name dies solis-Day

of the Sun, reveals that he taught his Gentile converts to

regulate their lives by the Jewish calendar.

     In the same epistle, Paul builds an elaborate argument based

upon the festival of Passover and unleavened bread in order to

exhort the Corinthians, "Let us keep the festival" (1 Cor 5:6-8).

The whole argument and exhortation to keep Passover would have

been meaningless to the Gentile congregation of Corinth unless

Paul had taught about the Jewish religious calendar. In the light

of these considerations we conclude, with Martin, that" although

the temporal references in Paul's letters are sparse, 1 Corin-

thians provides strong evidence for the Pauline adoption of the

Jewish practice that marked time by festivals and Sabbaths." 41

     The Christian adherance to the Jewish calendar is especially

evident in the book of Acts. Repeatedly, Paul proclaims the

Gospel in synagogues and in the outdoors on the Sabbath (Acts

13:14,44; 16:13; 17:2). In Troas, Paul speaks to the believers on

the first day from Sabbath (mia ton sabbaton) (Acts 20:7). The

portrayal of Paul in Acts," as Martin points out, "supplies clear

evidence that Christians mark time by segments of festivals and

Sabbaths." 42 

     This conclusion is clearly supported by Colossians 2:16

where we find the standard Jewish nomenclature of annual feasts,

monthly new moons, and weekly Sabbaths.

     The fact that Paul taught his Gentile congregations to

reject their pagan calendar, where the days were named after

planetary gods and the months after deified emperors, and to

reckon time according to the Jewish religious calendar, does not

necessarily mean that he taught them to practice Jewish religious

rituals. The Romans themselves replaced just before the origin of

Christianity their "eight day week-nundinum" with the Jewish

seven-day week and adopted in the first century the Jewish

Sabbath as their new day for rest and feasting, without the

concomitant adoption of the Jewish rituals. 43 

     By the same token, Paul taught his Gentile converts to

reckon time according to the Jewish religious calendar without

expecting them to practice the rituals associated with it. A good

example is Paul's discussion of the new meaning of the feasts of

Passover and Unleavened Bread in the light of Christ's event (1

Cor 5:6-8). 44

Superstitious Motivation

     Our preceding discussion shows that the temporal categories

of Galatians 4:10 ("days, and months, and seasons, and years")

are pagan and not Jewish, like the list found in Colossians 2:16.

To argue, as Ratzlaff does, that the Galatians were observing the

Old Covenant Holy Days means to ignore the immediate context

where Paul speaks of pagan temporal categories to which the

Galatians were turning back again.

     The Galatians' observance of pagan sacred times was

motivated by superstitious beliefs in astral influences. This is

suggested by Paul's charge that their adoption of these practices

was tantamount to a return to their former pagan subjection to

elemental spirits and demons (Gal 4:8-9). Paul's concern is not

to expose the superstitious ideas attached to these observances

but to challenge the whole system of salvation which the

Galatians' false teachers had devised. By conditioning

justification and acceptance with God to such things as

circumcision and the observance of pagan days and seasons, the

Galatians were making salvation dependent upon human achievement.

This for Paul was a betrayal of the Gospel: "You are severed from

Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen

away from grace" (Gal 5:4).

     It is within this context that Paul's denouncement of the

observance of days and seasons must be understood. If the

motivations for these observances had not undermined the vital

principle of justification by faith in Jesus Christ, Paul would

only have recommended tolerance and respect, as he does in Romans

14. The motivation for these practices, however, adulterated the

very ground of salvation. Thus the Apostle had no choice but

strongly to reject them. In Galatians as in Colossians, then, it

is not the principle of Sabbathkeeping that Paul opposes, but

rather the perverted use of cultic observations which were

designed to promote salvation as a human achievement rather than

as a divine gift of grace.

Conclusion

     Several conclusions emerge from this study of Paul's

attitude toward the law, in general, and the Sabbath, in

particular.

     First, the three texts (Col 2:14-16; Rom 14:5, Gal 4:10)

generally adduced as proof of Paul's repudiation of the Sabbath

do not deal with the validity or invalidity of the Sabbath

commandment for Christians but, rather, with ascetic and cultic

practices which undermined (especially in Colossians and

Galatians) the vital principle of justification by faith in Jesus

Christ.

     Second, in the crucial passage of Colossians 2:16, Paul's

warning is not against the validity of observing the Sabbath and

festivals as such but against the authority of false teachers to

legislate on the manner of their observance. Implicitly, Paul

expresses approval rather than disapproval of their observance.

Any condemnation had to do with a perversion rather than a

precept.

     Third, Paul's tolerance with respect to diet and days (Rom

14:36) indicates that he would not have promoted the abandonment

of the Sabbath and the adoption of Sunday observance instead. If

he had done so, he would have encountered endless disputes with

Sabbath advocates, especially among Jewish Christians. The

absence of any trace of such a polemic is perhaps the most

telling evidence of Paul's respect for the institution of the

Sabbath.

     In the final analysis, Paul's attitude toward the Sabbath

must be determined not on the basis of his denunciation of

heretical and superstitious observances which may have influenced

Sabbathkeeping, but rather on the basis of his overall attitude

toward the law.

     The failure to understand that Paul rejects the law as a

method of salvation but upholds it as a moral standard of

Christian conduct has been the root cause of much

misunderstanding of Paul's attitude toward the law, in general,

and toward the Sabbath, in particular. May this study contribute

to clarify this misunderstanding and allow us to discover, with

Paul, that "the law is good, if any one uses it lawfully" (1 Tim

1:8).

NOTES TO CHAPTER 6

l. For a brief historical survey of this interpretation, see

Samuele Bacchiocchi, "Paul and the Sabbath," in From Sabbath to

Sunday (Rome, 1977), Appendix, pp.339-343.

2. Paul K. Jewett, "The Lord's Day: A Theological Guide to the

Christian Day of Worship" (Grand Rapids, 1971), p.45.

3. "The Sabbath in Acts and the Epistles," Bible Study prepared

by the Worldwide Church of God and posted in its web page

(www.wcg.org, September, 1998), p.2.

4. Ibid.

5. Dale Ratzlaff, "Sabbath in Crisis: Transfer/Modification?

Reformation/Continuation? Fulfilment/Transformation?" (Applegate,

California, 1990), pp.173-174.

6. Ibid., p.174.

7. Commenting on Colossians 2:14,15, Ratzlaff writes: "What was

the 'certificate of debt' or the 'decrees' which were nailed to

the Cross? In context, Paul has been speaking about the old

covenant" (note 5, p.156). This cannot be true, because in the

context Paul refutes the Colossian heresy by affirming the

fullness of God's forgiveness.

8. Dale Ratzlaff (note 5), pp.155-156.

9. Ibid., p.156.

10.Ibid., pp.156-161.

11. Eduard Lohse, "A Commentary on the Epistles to the Colossians

and to Philemon" (Philadelphia, 1971), p.116. In a similar vein,

Herold Weiss emphasizes that in Paul's argument (Col 2:8-19), the

law "plays no role at all" ("The Law in the Epistle to the

Colossians," The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 34 [1972]: 311).

12. Douglas R. De Lacey, "The Sabbath/Sunday Question and the Law

in the Pauline Corpus," "From Sabbath to Lord's Day. A Biblical,

Historical, and Theological Investigation," ed. Donald A. Carson

(Grand Rapids, 1982), p.173. Emphasis supplied.

13. For a lengthy list of commentators who interpret the

cheirographon either as the "certificate of indebtedness"

resulting from our transgressions or as the "book containing the

record of sin," see Samuele Bacchiocchi, "From Sabbath to Sunday.

A Historical Investigation of the Rise of Sunday Observance in

Early Christianity" (Rome, 1977), Appendix, pp.349-350.

14. Martin Luther, "Wider die himmlischen Propheten," in his

Samtliche Schriften, ed. by Johann Georg Walch (1890), vol. XX,

col. 148.

15. Dale Ratzlaff (note 5), p.163. 1

16. Ibid., pp.161-162.

17. Douglas R. De Lacey (note 12), p.182. 

18. Ibid., emphasis supplied.

19. Troy Martin, "Pagan and Judeo-Christian Time-keeping Schemes

in Galatians 4:10 and Colossians 2:16," New Testament Studies 42

(1996), p.111. 

20. Eduard Lohse (note 11), p.155.

21. For texts and discussion, see G. Bornhamm, "Lakanon, "

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel

(Grand Rapids, 1967), vol. 4, p.67; also J. Behm writes in the

same Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, IV, p.297: "The

Greeks and Romans knew that abstention makes receptive to

ecstatic revelations."

22. For a discussion of Colossians 2:17, see Samuele Bacchiocchi,

"From Sabbath to Sunday" (note 1), pp.356-357.

23. Eduard Lohse (note 11), p.116.

24. See the Septuagint on 2 Chron 2:4; 31:3; Neh 10:33; Ezek

45:17; Hos 2:11. Also Jub 1:14; Jos. Ber. 3:11; Justin, Dialogue

with Trypho 8:4. 

25. See, The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Washington,

D. C., 1957), vol.7, pp.205-206.

26. This is the view of Nobert Hugede, Commentaire de L'Epitre

aux Colossiens (Paris, 1969), p. 144. On the plural usage of

"Sabbaths" to designate the week as a whole, see Eduard Lohse

(note 11), pp.7,20.

27. Gunter Bornhamm emphasizes this view when he writes: "Paul

mentions New Moon and Sabbath (Col 2:16), days, months, season,

and years (Gal 4:10), i.e., in each case days and seasons that do

not stand under the sign of the history of salvation, but under

the sign of the periodic cycles of nature, i.e., corresponding to

the movement of the stars" ("The Heresy of Colossians," in Fred

O. Francis and Wayne A. Meeks, eds., Conflict at Colossae, SBL

Sources for Biblical Study 4, 1973, p.131).

28. Texts and discussion are found in Samuele Bacchiocchi, "From

Sabbath to Sunday" (note 1), pp.173f. and 243.

29. "Paul and the Sabbath," Bible Study prepared by the Worldwide

Church of God and posted in its web page (www.wcg.org, September,

1998), p. l.

30. "The Sabbath in Acts and the Epistles," Bible Study prepared

by the Worldwide Church of God and posted in its web page

(www.wcg.org, September, 1998), p.2.

31. Dale Ratzlaff (note 5), p.169.

32. The Nazarite's vow included abstention from all grape

products (Num 6:2-4). This, however, was a temporary and

voluntary vow. Some, such as Samuel (1 Sam 1:11) and John the

Baptist (Luke 1:15) were Nazarites for life. But we have no

record of a person taking the vow voluntarily for life. Perpetual

vows were taken by parents on behalf of children. The Rechabites

led a nomadic life in tents and abstained from all intoxicating

drinks (Jer 35:1-19). For a study on the Biblical teaching

regarding the use of alcoholic beverages, see Samuele

Bacchiocchi, Wine in the Bible (Berrien Springs, Michigan, 1989).

My study shows that the Bible disapproves of the use of fermented

wine but approves the consumption of unfermented wine, commonly

called "grape juice."

33. Paul K. Jewett wisely acknowledges that "if Paul had

introduced Sunday worship among the Gentiles, it seems likely

Jewish opposition would have accused his temerity in setting

aside the law of the Sabbath, as was the case with the rite of

circumcision (Acts 21:21)" (note 2), p.57. 

34. For texts and discussion, see Samuele Bacchiochi, "From

Sabbath to Sunday" (note 1), p.254.

35. See, for example, Willy Rordorf, Sunday: "The History of the

Day of Rest and Worship in the Earliest Centuries of the

Christian Church" (Philadelphia, 1968), p.131; C.S.Mosna, Storia

della Domenica dalle Origini Fino agli Inizi del V. Secolo (Rome,

1969), p.183.

36. Dale Ratzlaff (note 5), p.165.

37. For a discussion of scholarly views regarding the meaning of

stoicheia, see Samuele Bacchiochi, From Sabbath to Sunday (note

1), pp.344-345.

38. Troy Martin (note 19), p.119. See also idem, "But Let

Everyone Discern the Body of Christ (Colossians 2:17)," Journal

of Biblical Literature 114/2 (1995), p.255.

39. For a discussion of the pagan calendar, see also E. J.

Bickerman, "Chronology of the Ancient World" (Ithaca, New York,

1968), pp.70-79. 

40. Troy Martin (note 19), pp.117,119.

41. Ibid., pp.108-109. 

42. Ibid., p.109.

43. The Roman adoption of the seven-day planetary week just prior

to the beginning of Christianity is discussed at some length in

Samuele Bacchiochi, "From Sabbath to Sunday' (note 1), pp.

238-251.

44. For a discussion of the observance and meaning of Passover/

Unleavened Bread in the New Testament, see Samuele Bacchiocchi,

"God's Festivals in Scripture and History: Volume 1: The Spring

Festivals" (Berrien Springs, Michigan, 1995), pp.75-77.

                           ....................

Entered on my Website May 2008