"an holyday, or of the new moon, or"
We now arrive at one of the most neglected words in the analysis of this passage: "heorte". So far, I have found only one person who has ever even looked at this word.1 And in doing that all he really did was look at how the word was translated elsewhere in the New Testament.2 Apparently, I am the first to even look at how the word is used in the Old Testament (see Table 3). I have found that it is never used in association with either the Day of Atonement or the feast of Trumpets, both of which are described as sabbaths in Lev. 23.
It is commonly claimed that the order in which the days are mentioned is that of annual, monthly, and weekly.3 One sometimes finds references to the following texts in the OT: 1 Chron. 23:31; 2 Chron. 2:4, 8:13, 31:3; Neh. 10:33; Ezek. 45:17 and Hos. 2:11 -- see Table 1. However, when one reads these texts one is surprised to find that, with the exception of the last two, the feasts are given in reverse order!4 Note that the more usual sequence occurs in 1 Esdras 5:52:
And after that, the continual oblations, and the sacrifice of the sabbaths, and of the new moons, and of all holy feasts.
Note that this evidence is contrary to the assertion that is commonly made that these verses reveal the "same annual, monthly and weekly sequence."5 Deck goes so far as to say "an examination of these passages reveals a regular order, one might even say a formula. ... compare this order with that of Colossians 2. 16; what a remarkable correspondence!"6 Remarkable indeed!
Giem directs our attention to Numbers 28 in which he shows that "vss. 9-10 mention the offering "on the sabbath day" ...; vss. 11-15 describe the offering "at the beginnings of your months" ...; 28:16-29:38 depict the offerings for several annual festivals ..."7 He further notes that Ezek. 46:4-15 has the sequence of sabbath (vs. 4), new moon (vs. 6), and "at the feasts and the appointed seasons" (vs. 11).8 He also points out that there are other passages that have "partial parallels"; see Table 2 in the appendix.9
Giem notes that there is further evidence from the Dead Sea Scroll called "The War of the Sons of Light with the Sons of Darkness" (1 QM -- in 2:4 we have the sequence: "the festivals, new moons, sabbaths"), the Book of Jubilees (1:14), and 1 Enoch.10 However, as Giem concludes, most of these references are "a hodgepodge of calendrical occasions."11 So, we cannot take the order as being directly indicative as to what the term "sabbatwn" refers to.12 The preceding evidence thus reveals that there is no "well-established OT time sequence of religious days".13 However, Richardson suggests that although the sequence is reversed in some of the OT passages the fact that "new moon" is always the middle term it would then be logical to assume that "the sabbath being described is the weekly Sabbath." Of course, this assumption is logical only if you start with an assumption that this is a calendrical progression. As another example, of the kind of sequence of days: in Justin Martyr's Dialogues With Trypho (8:4 -- "If, then, you are willing to listen to me (for I have already considered you a friend), first be circumcised, then observe what ordinances have been enacted with respect to the Sabbath, and the feasts, and the new moons of God; and, in a word, do all things which have been written in the law: and then perhaps you shall obtain mercy from God.") we find the sequence "the sabbath, the festivals and the new moons." Surely, here Justin is referring to the seventh-day Sabbath even though it is listed first and the sequence is unlike what we find anywhere else in the OT.
Another suggestion is that whenever the word "sabbath(s)" is mentioned with new moon(s) in the OT then the reference is to the weekly Sabbath14 - we should note however, that it is when only the new moon and the Sabbath are mentioned is this so; when other days are brought in the picture changes very quickly. In addition to the preceding texts we can add: 2 Kings 4:23; Isa. 1:13, 66:23, Ezek. 46:1, 3 and Amos 8:5. Again, if we read the texts for ourselves the evidence isn't all that clear - with the exceptions of Isa. 66:23 and Ezek. 46:1. In both of these cases, however, the fact that the reference is to the weekly Sabbath is made explicitly clear by the passage itself.
Another possibility is that the word "sabbatwn" refers to week-days. This interpretation looks at the following texts: in the LXX: Ps 23:1; 47:1; 93:1 and in the NT: Mark 16:2; Luke 24:1; Acts 20:7.15
Another interesting possibility is that the reference here isn't to just the seventh-day Sabbath, but also to, the jubilee Sabbath and to the sabbath of the land every seven years.16 Barnes' note on this is especially interesting:
The word Sabbath in the Old Testament is applied not only to the seventh day, but to all the days of holy rest that were observed by the Hebrews, and particularly to the beginnings and endings of their great festivals. There is, doubtless, reference to those days in this place, as the word is used in the plural number, and the apostle does not refer particularly to the Sabbath properly so called. There is no evidence from this passage that he [Paul] would teach that there was no obligation to observe any holy time, for there is not the slightest reason to believe that he meant to teach that one of the ten commandments had ceased to be binding on mankind. If he had used the word in the singular number-"the Sabbath," it would then, of course, have been clear that he meant to teach that that commandment had ceased to be binding. But the use of the plural number, and the connection, show that he had his eye on the great number of days which were observed by the Hebrews as festivals, as a part of their ceremonial and typical law, and not to the moral law, or the ten commandments. No part of the moral law -- no one of the ten commandments could be spoken of as 'a shadow of good things to come.' These commandments are, from the nature of moral law, of perpetual and universal obligation.17
It is interesting to note here that Deck, an anti-sabbatarian, may have supplied us with the key to solving our dilemma. He notes that the word "sabbatwn," which he takes to refer to the seventh-day Sabbath, is placed by Paul in the "same category" as other ceremonial days.18
Summary
Perhaps, however, it is not the exact sequence that is important here. That is, it doesn't really matter if the sequence is a progressive one or if it is regressive. For as Richardson points out "it does seem safe to say that there is an apparent relationship."19 The question really is: What is the nature of that relationship? Gunther states that the sequence "implies annual, monthly and weekly observances."20 Scott states the matter more bluntly: "Three kinds of festival were recognized in Judaism -- annual, monthly, weekly."21 However, since Sabbath critics have made a great deal about the precise nature of the sequence and as we have seen it does not hold up under close examination then I am uneasy in claiming that "sabbatwn" here definitely means the seventh-day Sabbath to the absolute exclusion of all other possibilities.22 We should here note that many commentators never even consider any of the other possible alternatives. For example, couldn't the calendrical aspect of the listing of times be in the form of yearly - monthly - yearly chiasm? Why isn't this possibility even considered much less analyzed?23
As another example of the kind of "tunnel vision" that can occur on this issue is when Thomson states that the "keeping of the Sabbath or seventh day of the week was a leading feature of the Jewish religion ...."24 While it is certainly true that the Sabbath was "a leading feature" it was also by no means the only one.
And, even if I were to say that the word "sabbatwn" here does refer to the seventh-day Sabbath the text definitely does not say that they were done away with; nor is Sabbath observance condemned.25 Also, we should note that the interpretation that "sabbatwn" could here refer to the feast of Trumpets and to the Day of Atonement, as well, is certainly a more legitimate alternative based on the total context -- see below for details.26
Richison claims (without supplying any supporting references) that "the Gnosticism of the Lycus Valley had its systems of new moon worship."27 If that were the case then perhaps Paul isn't referring to exclusively Jewish ceremonial days in this verse. Havener expresses a similar view about the whole verse when he writes: "As members of the body of Christ, the author's community is not subject to regulations about food, drink, festivals, new moons, and sabbaths which are associated with cosmic powers and astrological signs."28 However, these suggestions are highly unlikely. It is really inconceivable that Paul would have reacted so gently with the believers at Colossae if they were mixing in pagan rituals and beliefs into their Christian life. Witness the vigor of the language he used on the believers in Galatia for wandering after purely Jewish practices!
Note that Paul does not say that the members of the church in Colossae should not, or must not, keep these days.29 The text basically declares that they were observing the feast days, new moon and the sabbath day(s) without any reproof from Paul for doing so. As De Lacey has very clearly pointed out: the "most natural way of taking the rest of the passage is not that he [the ascetic] also imposes a ritual of feast days, but rather that he objects to certain elements of such observation."30 What exactly that element is is the real question here. As we pointed out earlier Troy Martin has noted that the critics of the church in Colossae may be condemning "the Colossian Christians for engaging, not engaging, or engaging incorrectly in these practices."31 As Walker points out: "Paul is not condemning "Jewish" customs but the manner in which they were being observed."32 Or, alternatively, as O'Brien has suggested: "Paul is not condemning the use of sacred days or seasons as such; it is the wrong motive involved ....".33 We should note that Paul, himself, kept a feast day in Jerusalem (Acts 18:21; see also 1 Cor. 5:8) long after (Colossians being written between 57 - 62 A.D.) the crucifixion in 30 A.D. supposedly rendered them all void according to the interpretation given to the NT by some interpreters. It may be, although not likely, that the ascetics were judging the members of the church at Colossae for not celebrating these days in the manner that was "distinctively Jewish." Some customs of the Jews, while either innocuous or even beneficial in themselves, were considered part of the "national and ethnic consciousness" of the Jews. For example, Thompson observed that the keeping of the Sabbath "was a leading feature of the Jewish religion" and that these "regulations [as he understands the terms mentioned in vs. 16 to be] formed the basis of Jewish loyalty to God".34 Thus, these things could then be used as badges of how Jewish one was. This, of course, then points the individual away from Christ and fixes the focus on self -- both of which Paul would fight against repeatedly in his ministry.
1. Andrews, John N. "Colossians II, 14--17," in White, James The Seventh Day of the Week is the Sabbath of the Lord. (Rochester, NY: Advent Review Office, 1854? microfilm): pages 49-54. Back to text
2. Andrews notes that the term "heorte" is translated as "feast" 26 times in the KJV and only here is it translated as "holyday". Back to text
3. Bacchiocchi [1988, page 116]. See also Gladson, [Jerry A. "The Sabbath in Christian Life: A Reconsideration," page 2] who says: "The full formula, which uses a chronological pattern, annual...monthly..weekly, invariably includes the weekly day Sabbath." Back to text
4. And yet we are told, as Gladson has done [op cit], that this is a "technical formula" and that "Paul uses the same formulaic style found repeatedly in the Old Testament ..." Vincent Word Studies describes it as the "same enumeration of sacred seasons". Noel [Ted "Sabbath-Sunday Discussion. Installment 6," email correspondence 9/12/2000, page 3] describes it as "a typical Jewish literary pattern." Paulien [ibid., page 4] also takes it as a "typical OT expression for annual, monthly and weekly celebrations." Oppenheimer [ibid., page 3] describes it as a "consistent pattern" with the "same type of progression in the O.T.." Bacchiocchi [(1977): page 358] notes that the "unanimous consensus of commentators is that these" days are in a "a logical and progressive sequence." In his 1988 book [page 117] he states it more carefully when he writes: "the sequence of the enumeration ... suggests yearly, monthly, and weekly festivities." Note how the New American Bible inserts the words right into the text: "on yearly or monthly feasts ...". Pipa [ibid., page 98] is far more accurate when he states that these "three terms are often used together ... to describe the various ceremonial days ...". Back to text
5. Brinsmead, Robert D. "Sabbatarianism Re-examined: Colossians 2:16," [page 5]. See also Canright, D. M. "Chapter XV - The Jewish Sabbath Abolished. Colossians 2. From "Seventh-day Adventism Renounced," on page 4 who neglects to point out this fact to his readers. Back to text
6. Deck, Norman C. The Lord's Day or the Sabbath: a reply to Seventh Day Adventists. (Pickering, 1931): page 79. On the other hand, D'Sena [ibid., page 21], wisely and simply refers to the "very combination of terms" with no note to the reader about the order of the terms. Likewise, Ratzlaff, [ibid., page 2] notes the "parallel in words and ideas from Ezekiel 45:17". Barth [ibid., page 339] is one of the few commentators on these verses who notes the differing order. Back to text
7. Giem, Paul "Sabbaton in Col 2:16," Andrews University Seminary Studies 19 (1981): 195-210; see page 198. Back to text
8. ibid., pages 199-200. Back to text
9. ibid., pages 200-1. Back to text
10. ibid., pages 202-6. Back to text
11. ibid., page 202. Back to text
12. contra www.bible.ca/7-Col2-14-16.htm: "The "Year, Month Week" pattern is so well established in the Old Testament, that Col 2:16 must refer to the weekly Sabbath. Notice, even Gal 4:10, following this pattern, states the weekly Sabbath is abolished!"
Note how mis-leading their chart is of the verses given in Table 1:*
| Yearly | monthly | weekly | |
| 1 Chronicles 23:31 | fixed festivals | new moons | Sabbaths |
| 2 Chronicles 31:3 | fixed festivals | new moons | Sabbaths |
| 2 Chronicles 8:13 | annual feasts | new moons | Sabbaths |
| 2 Chronicles 2:4 | appointed feasts | new moons | Sabbaths |
| Nehemiah 10:33 | appointed times | new moon | Sabbaths |
| Ezekiel 45:17 | appointed feasts | new moons | Sabbaths |
| Hosea 2:11 | festal assemblies | new moons | Sabbaths |
| Galatians 4:10 | years | months | days |
| Colossians 2:16 | festival | new moon | Sabbath day |
*a similarly mis-leading chart can be found at www.graftedin2torah.org Back to text
13. contra Coffen [ibid., page 14] and Schwiezer, Eduard The Letter to the Colossians: A Commentary. Translated by Andrew Chester (Augsburg Publishing, 1976, ET 1982): page 155 --he sequence festival-new moon-Sabbath corresponds precisely to that of the Greek Bible ...". Back to text
14. Brinsmead [ibid., page 5]. Back to text
15. Bacchiocchi makes this suggestion [1988, pages 116-7]; he cites Lohse, Eduard "sabbaton, paraskeun," [TDNT 7:7, 20] as support. Back to text
16. See Gill. Back to text
17. Barnes, Albert "Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians," Notes on the New Testament. Edited by Robert Frew (Baker Books, 1998 reprint; originally published 1884-5). Back to text
18. Deck [ibid., page 74]. Back to text
19. Richardson [1960, page 74]. Back to text
20. Gunther [page 89]. Back to text Find this source
21. Scott, E. F. The Epistles of Paul to the Colossians, to Philemon and to the Ephesians. Moffat New Testament Commentary (Harper & Row, 1930): page 52. Back to text
22. For examples of this line of thinking see Canright [ibid., page 4], Brinsmead [ibid., page 5], Deck [ibid., pages 79 and 86], and Riggle, H. M "The Sabbath and the Lord's Day," on page 2. Back to text
23. I owe this idea to a phone conversation with Ron du Preez who relayed it from a conversation with Kenneth Strand. Back to text
24. Thompson, G. H. P. The Letters of Paul to the Ephesians, to the Colossians and to Philemon. Cambridge Bible Commentary (Cambridge, 1967): page 148. Back to text
25. contra Richison, Grant C. "Colossians 2:16,17," on page 3 and Fortner: "In Colossians 2:16-17, Paul forbids the observance of a legal sabbath day on the basis of the fact that in Christ we are entirely free from the law (Rom. 6:14; 7:4; 10:4)." at Why Not Observe A Literal Sabbath? Colossians 2:16-17. Back to text
26. Jewett, Paul K. The Lord's Day. (Eerdmans, 1971): page 44, in note 20 attempts to dispel this possibility by noting how each is referred to individually in the LXX - the key here is that Paul is referring to both! Some critics have pointed out that the Day of Atonement is referred to as "sabbata sabbatwn" and not simply as "sabbath". However, we should note that while this is true twice (Lev. 16:31 and 23:32), in the closing phrase of the latter it is called simply "sabbata". Back to text
27 Richison [ibid., page 3]; likewise, Efrid [ibid., page 70]. Back to text
28. Havener, Ivan First Thessalonians, Philippians, Philemon, Second Thessalonians, Colossians, Ephesians. (Liturgical Press, 1983): page 77. Back to text
29. Fortner and others. Back to text
30. De Lacey, D. R. "The Sabbath/Sunday Question and the Law in the Pauline Corpus," in From Sabbath to Lord's Day: A Biblical, Historical, and Theological Investigation. Edited by D. A. Carson (Zondervan, 1982): 160-95; see page 182. Back to text
31. Troy Martin [1996, page 107]. Back to text
32. Walker; see also Lohse [1971, page 115]. Back to text
33. O'Brien [page 139]. Back to text
34. Thompson [page 148]. Back to text
Back to Colossians 2:16-17 Main Study Page (introduction)
© David J. Conklin (11/11/2002)