Author: David Wilber
Did Paul reject the ongoing relevance of the Sabbath and festivals prescribed in the Torah? Many cite Colossians 2:16–17 as proof that he did. However, a growing body of scholarship calls that interpretation into question. Scholars argue that the Colossian believers observed the biblical calendar and that the illegitimate judgment directed against them came from ascetic critics who did not. Drawing on this scholarship, I argue that Colossians 2:16–17 does not invalidate the Sabbath and festivals but instead affirms their value.
Introduction
In Colossians 2:16–17, Paul tells his readers not to let anyone judge them “with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath,” explaining that these practices “are a shadow of things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.” Unlike Galatians 4:10 and Romans 14:5,[1] this passage unambiguously refers to the biblical calendar outlined in the Law of Moses. Many interpreters claim that this passage is Paul’s rebuttal to Jewish “legalists” who wrongly expected followers of Jesus to keep the Sabbath and festivals. For that reason, Colossians 2:16–17 is often cited as proof that Paul considered observance of the biblical calendar a matter of indifference.
A clear expression of this popular view comes from John MacArthur, who writes, “The false teachers were telling the Colossians that it was not enough to have Christ; they also needed to keep the Jewish ceremonial law,” including “festivals” and “Sabbath-day worship.”[2] MacArthur goes on to argue that “Jesus Christ is the reality to which the shadows pointed,” and therefore, “any continuing preoccupation with the shadows once the reality has come is pointless.”[3] In other words, according to MacArthur, Paul is assuring his readers that they need not accept criticism from those attempting to impose observance of the Sabbath and festivals upon them because Christ’s coming has rendered those practices irrelevant.
However, although this interpretation of Colossians 2:16–17 is widely held, a growing number of scholars have begun to challenge it.[4] For instance, Brian Allen, Herold Weiss, Troy Martin, and others argue that Paul is making the opposite point: the Colossian believers were not being criticized for disregarding the biblical calendar but rather for observing it. These scholars identify Paul’s opponents in Colossians as strict ascetics (see Col. 2:18–23) who condemned the Colossian believers for their festive eating and drinking on the Sabbath, festivals, and new moon—celebrations that Paul describes as “a shadow of things to come” (Col 2:17). Here, it is argued that Paul has in mind the eschatological age to come, when everyone will worship the LORD from Sabbath to Sabbath and from new moon to new moon (Isa. 66:22–23), and when God’s people will partake of a lavish feast with rich food and well-aged wine (Isa. 25:6–9).[5] The celebratory joy experienced during the Sabbath, festivals, and new moons foreshadows this coming joy. For this reason, in Colossians 2:16, Paul urges his readers to ignore the criticisms of these ascetics who disapproved of such celebrations.
Taken on its own, Colossians 2:16–17 could allow for either interpretation: Paul’s readers might be facing criticism for neglecting the Sabbath and festivals, or alternatively, for observing them.[6] Therefore, in order to determine which interpretation should be preferred, we must ask whether there is evidence that Paul’s readers in Colossae kept these practices. It is equally important to consider whether Paul’s opponents kept them. If Paul’s readers were not keeping these practices while his opponents were, then the popular interpretation would make sense. On that reading, Paul’s opponents, who upheld the biblical calendar, were judging Paul’s readers for their failure to do so. If, however, Paul’s readers were keeping these practices while his opponents were not, then the opposite reading makes sense: Paul’s readers were being judged for observing the biblical calendar by critics who thought they should not.
Paul and the Colossian Believers Observed the Biblical Calendar
Many interpreters have assumed that neither Paul nor his predominantly Gentile audience at Colossae adhered to the biblical calendar at the time Colossians was written, but this assumption should be called into question. The apostles operated within first-century Judaism, which observed the biblical calendar. The New Testament indicates that Jewish followers of Jesus retained this calendar in their worship and communal life. When Gentiles began following Jesus, they joined a messianic Jewish community and would therefore have embraced the same calendar observed by their Jewish fellow believers.[7]
Indeed, according to the Book of Acts, Paul did not reject the biblical calendar after becoming a follower of Jesus. The biblical calendar is part of God’s law, and Luke goes to great lengths in Acts to depict Paul as living “in observance of the law” (Acts 21:24; cf. 24:14–17; 25:8; 28:17). As Joshua Jipp writes, “Luke’s view of Paul is that he is a faithful, Torah-observant Jew, faithful to his ancestral heritage in every way.”[8] Luke repeatedly highlights Paul’s regular participation in the synagogue services on the Sabbath, where he ministered to both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 13:14–15, 42–44; 17:1–4; 18:4). Luke also presents Paul as faithfully observing the annual biblical festivals, such as Pentecost and the Day of Atonement (Acts 20:16; 27:9).[9] As Justin Hardin observes, these references in Acts indicate that Paul “was not at all critical of the Jewish calendar, but even continues to orient his life around it.”[10] Additionally, Acts 15:21 suggests that James expected that Gentiles who became followers of Jesus—most of whom were already participating in synagogue services[11]—would attend synagogue services each Sabbath. As Benjamin Frostad argues, this expectation from James “assumes that Gentile believers will have an ongoing relationship with the (believing) Jewish community [and] that their lives will be structured around the biblical calendar.”[12]
More evidence for early Christian observance of the biblical calendar appears in Paul’s first epistle to the Corinthians. Paul’s brief remark that he will “stay in Ephesus until Pentecost” (1 Cor. 16:8) indicates that he and his readers were familiar with the timing of this festival. Furthermore, as David Rudolph notes, “since Pentecost is calculated by counting fifty days after ‘the day after the Sabbath’ during Passover week (Lev 23:15–16), Paul implies that the literal day of Passover was not insignificant to the community.”[13] Indeed, earlier in the epistle, Paul explicitly instructs his Jewish and Gentile readers, “Let us therefore celebrate the festival” (1 Cor. 5:8). Paul’s use of the term ἑορτάζω (“festival”) in 1 Corinthians 5:8 indicates that he is referring to celebrating the actual festival of Passover.[14] As J. Brian Tucker writes, “The fact that he explicitly mentions a festival suggests that he expects the Corinthian Christ-group to engage in a real Passover celebration, even if it is now imbued with new meaning considering Christ’s sacrifice.”[15]
Finally, the Quartodeciman controversy reveals that in the late second century CE a substantial portion of the churches in Asia Minor—where Colossae was located—continued to celebrate Passover on the fourteenth of Nisan in accordance with the biblical calendar.[16] Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus, writes that he maintained the practice handed down from figures such as John, Philip, and Polycarp, stating: “We observe the exact day; neither adding, nor taking away” (Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. 5.24.2).[17] Hence, long after Paul wrote his letter to the Colossians, Christian communities in Asia Minor were still observing Passover in accordance with the biblical calendar, which is difficult to explain if Christians in the region had already abandoned the calendar in the first century.
Much more could be discussed,[18] but the evidence presented here undermines the popular assumption that the early believers were not observing the Sabbath and the festivals at the time Paul wrote his letter. As Brian Allen writes, “Considering the New Testament evidence, it is plausible that Paul continued in these practices and encouraged other communities of Jews and Gentiles to do the same.”[19]
Paul’s Opponents in Colossians Did NOT Observe the Biblical Calendar
Having examined the evidence suggesting that Paul and the Colossian believers observed the biblical calendar, we now turn to the question of whether the Colossian opponents did. Once again, establishing whether the opponents kept the biblical calendar helps to determine whether the practices mentioned in verse 16 belong to the Colossian believers or to their critics. If the evidence shows that Paul’s opponents were not keeping the biblical calendar while his readers were, then Colossians 2:16 is best understood as Paul’s admonition to his readers not to accept criticism for observing the Sabbath, festivals, and new moon.
Setting verse 16 itself aside as the disputed text, Paul’s descriptions of the Colossian opponents’ teachings may shed light on whether they likely upheld the biblical calendar. Two points are worth mentioning.
First, Paul states that his opponents were “insisting on asceticism” (Col. 2:18, cf. 23). Although this description offers limited detail, Herold Weiss points out that “ascetic practices are not characteristic of the Torah, or of mainstream Judaism.”[20] Moreover, apart from the requirement to fast on Yom Kippur, the Sabbath, festivals, and new moon celebrations were not typically connected with fasting or self-denial.[21] This is clearly reflected in the book of Judith (ca. 100 BCE), which depicts Judith as refraining from fasting on “the day before the Sabbath and the Sabbath itself, the day before the new moon, the day of the new moon, and the feasts and celebration days of the house of Israel” (Judith 8:6; cf. Neh. 8:9–13; Tobit 2:1–2; Josephus, Ant. 4.203). A group insisting on asceticism, therefore, would have little reason to promote the biblical calendar, since its Sabbaths and festivals center on communal joy and feasting rather than the asceticism and “severity to the body” that Paul attributes to the Colossian opponents.
Second, Paul characterizes his opponents’ teachings as being “according to human tradition” (Col. 2:8). Their regulations—“Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch”—are presented not as commands of God but as “human precepts and teachings” (Col 2:21). In light of this description, Weiss observes that the opponents’ teachings are not based in the Torah: “The specifics of these regulations are beyond us, but that their origin is not in the torah is certain.”[22] If the Colossian opponents’ teachings are derived from human tradition rather than the Torah, it is difficult to see how they could be seeking to impose the Torah’s Sabbaths and festivals.
These two observations drawn from the context of Colossians 2 indicate that the opponents were unlikely to be observing the biblical calendar. To further support this conclusion, we may also consider a proposal concerning the possible identity of the Colossian opponents. As Troy Martin has shown, the human precepts and teachings promoted by Paul’s opponents in Colossians bear a strong resemblance to those of the ancient Cynics, who were staunchly opposed to wine and festive meals.[23] For instance, the Cynic philosopher Crates wrote, “Accustom yourselves to eat barley cake and to drink water, and do not taste fish and wine. For the latter, like the drugs of Circe, make old men bestial and young men effeminate” (Crates, Epistle 14).[24] Interestingly, this admonition from Crates “uses terms resembling the decree (μηδὲ γεύσῃ) in Col 2:22.”[25]
Moreover, as Martin observes, the Cynics also condemned the use of calendars:
Cynic sources contain few references to time because the Cynics disregard time beyond the hours of the day, and these hours are only of relative usefulness. Instead of organizing their lives according to a system of time, they prefer to live day by day…Contentment and happiness for the Cynic means ignoring temporal constraints. The anti-cultural Cynic movement disparages the cultural phenomenon of time. This Cynic attitude toward time promotes a pungent critique of the Christian regulation of communal life by a religious calendar. The Cynic considers this practice a useless waste of effort that detracts from the true pursuit of morality and happiness.[26]
Beyond their opposition to festive eating and drinking and to the use of calendars, the Cynics also rejected physical comforts and promoted rigorous bodily discipline, which aligns with Paul’s depiction of his opponents as advocating “severity to the body” (Col. 2:23).[27] Given these features of Cynic philosophy, it is evident that its adherents would be highly critical of the Sabbath, festivals, and new moons—celebrations marked by a calendar, and which often involved wine, festive meals, and rejoicing.
In any case, since Paul’s opponents had teachings that stemmed not from the Torah but from “human precepts,”[28] Colossians 2:16 should not be interpreted as a condemnation of critics who were imposing biblical calendar observance. Instead, Paul is instructing his readers, who were observing the biblical calendar, to disregard the criticisms of those who condemned their observance. As Martin concludes, “the Colossian Christians, not their critics, participate in a religious calendar that includes festivals, new moons, and Sabbaths.”[29]
A Closer Look at Colossians 2:16–17
Having shown that the practices referenced in verse 16 are those of the Colossian believers and not their critics, we are now in a better position to understand Paul’s exhortation in this passage:
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 a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. (Colossians 2:16–17)
The first thing to note is that Paul urges his readers not to allow their critics to pass judgment on them in regard to “food and drink” (Col. 2:16a). Some interpreters take this to be a reference to the Torah’s dietary laws and argue that the opponents were criticizing the Colossian believers because their practices related to “food and drink” did not conform to the Torah.[30] However, as argued above, since the opponents’ teachings were “formulations of human precepts and doctrines,” and therefore do not derive from the Torah,[31] it is difficult to explain why they would be criticizing the Colossian believers for disregarding the Torah’s dietary laws. Moreover, apart from restrictions that apply only to those under a Nazirite vow (Num 6:3) or to priests serving in the Tabernacle (Lev 10:9), the Torah does not regulate the consumption of wine (“drink”).
Instead of pointing to dietary laws, the terms “food” (βρῶσις) and “drink” (πόσις) are better understood as referring to the act of “eating and drinking” (cf. YLT, LSV).[32] The immediate link to the biblical calendar in the latter half of the verse indicates that Paul is thinking of the celebratory feasting and drinking associated with the Colossian believers’ festival observance. As Allen remarks, “food and drink in v. 16 do not refer to Levitical dietary instructions. Rather, their mention is actually a clue that ascetics were criticizing the Colossians for their lavish feasts during Sabbaths, festivals, and new moons, times that were not normally associated with fasting and affliction.”[33]
Paul’s instruction that his readers must not allow anyone to pass judgment on them also extends to matters of “a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath” (Col. 2:16b). This is an unambiguous reference to the biblical calendar (cf. 1 Chron. 23:31; 2 Chron. 31:3). The question, however, is whether the opponents were criticizing the believers for disregarding the biblical calendar or for observing it. As argued above, both biblical and historical evidence suggest that these early followers of Jesus were in fact keeping the biblical calendar when Paul wrote to them. Additionally, the description of the opponents in Colossians suggests that they themselves were not keeping the biblical calendar. For this reason, the interpretation that Paul’s readers were being criticized for observing the biblical calendar is to be preferred. As Allen writes, “Numerous texts portray the early believers in the Messiah, both Jew and Gentile, involved in the Jewish calendar…Paul wrote to encourage the Colossians that no one should condemn them for eating and drinking, especially on Sabbaths and festivals.”[34]
In Colossians 2:17a, Paul characterizes eating and drinking, along with festivals, new moons, and the Sabbath, as a shadow of things still to come: “These are a shadow of the things to come.” The use of the present-tense verb ἐστιν (“are”) indicates that, from the viewpoint of Paul’s readers, these practices are currently serving as shadows that point toward future realities.[35] Contrary to some translations that render this phrase in the past tense as “things that were to come” (e.g., NIV), the Greek does not permit such a reading. Some interpreters might appeal to Hebrews 10:1, which uses a similar expression (“a shadow of the good things to come”) to describe the Torah’s sacrificial system as pointing toward what the Messiah had already accomplished through his work on the cross, yet this parallel does not undermine the present-tense force of Colossians 2:17a. As Martin observes, in Hebrews 10:1, “the futurity of the good things to come is from the perspective of the Mosaic Law rather than from the perspective of the recipients of this letter…a future event relative to the Law but a past event relative to the present situation of the addressees.”[36] By contrast, in Colossians, Paul addresses the current situation of his readers, who are being criticized for practices they are currently participating in, and insists that these practices are a shadow of things to come. Accordingly, the “things to come” in Colossians 2:17a cannot refer to past events but rather must denote future realities from the perspective of Paul and his readers.
This raises the question of what exactly Paul means by “things to come.” In the context of Colossians, it appears to point to the believers’ future hopes, such as the Messiah’s return, the resurrection, and related eschatological expectations. As Weiss observes:
The other teachers promise access to ultimate reality by means of asceticism, worship with angels, and visions. In this connection they impose regulations as to what can be handled (2:14, 20). In opposition, the author of Colossians insists that ultimate reality is in the future, when the “things to come” come…In this case, the “shadow” is the present blurred manifestation of a hoped-for future reality. In its shadow the expected future is seen as coming. The eschatological future loomed large on the horizon of the author of Colossians. He defines the mystery in which the Colossians now have a share as “Christ in you the hope of glory” (1:27). He is concerned that they may abandon “the hope” (1:23), rather than “the faith.” In the introductory thanksgiving he praises God “because of the hope laid up for you in heaven” (1:5). In view of what the future holds for them, he instructs his readers “to make the most of the time” (4:5), since the Parousia is not far away. When the expected Parousia takes place and Christ appears, the author reminds them that they “will appear in glory” as well (3:4). Rather than to find present worship with angels and visions appealing, this author has his hopes firmly tied to the glorious future coming of Christ.[37]
In Isaiah’s vision of the messianic kingdom, all people will worship the LORD “from new moon to new moon, and from Sabbath to Sabbath” (Isa. 66:22–23). This depiction of the coming age associates the Sabbath and new moons with eschatological hope and expectation.[38] As Weiss remarks, the Sabbath, festivals, and new moons “are anticipations of the eschatological realities in which Christians have their hope”[39] The celebratory joy experienced while observing these appointed times represents “the present blurred manifestation of a hoped-for future reality.”[40] Hence, describing the Colossian believers’ practices as being a shadow of things to come “is clearly a way of giving them value.”[41]
According to Paul, the ultimate fulfillment of the believers’ hope will come when the Messiah returns in glory (Col. 3:4). Until then, he instructs his readers not to allow anyone to condemn them for observing the Sabbath, festivals, and new moons, since these practices serve as shadows that point ahead to that future glory. At the same time, Paul affirms that “the substance belongs to Christ” (Col. 2:17b).[42] That is, while the Sabbath and festivals provide a glimpse into the coming age, the Messiah himself embodies the reality they foreshadow. The joy and blessings of the coming age are anchored in a reality that has already been inaugurated in the Messiah and that believers, in some measure, already experience through their union with him.[43] Accordingly, far from being “pointless” (to use MacArthur’s word), the fact that these practices point to realities embodied in the Messiah actually imbues the Colossian believers’ celebrations with even greater significance. As G. Scott McKenzie argues, the biblical Sabbath and festivals serve “as a majestic reminder of past, present, and future redemption, thus necessitating their continued importance in the life of believers.”[44]
Conclusion
This study has argued that Colossians 2:16–17 does not abolish the Sabbath and biblical festivals but instead responds to criticism directed at believers who continued to observe them. The evidence suggests that Paul and the Colossian community lived according to the biblical calendar, whereas their opponents promoted ascetic practices rooted in human tradition rather than the Torah. In this context, Paul urges his readers not to accept criticism from those who opposed their festive eating and drinking on festivals, new moons, and the Sabbath. By describing these practices as “a shadow of things to come,” Paul emphasizes how they point forward to future realities associated with the Messiah’s return and the consummation of the kingdom—realities that are embodied in the Messiah himself. Read this way, Colossians 2:16–17 does not invalidate the Sabbath and festivals, but rather affirms their ongoing value.
[1] In Galatians 4:10, Paul warns his readers against returning to pagan practices, not against observing the biblical calendar. See, e.g., Justin Hardin, Galatians and the Imperial Cult: A Critical Analysis of the First Century, WUNT II 237 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008), 122–127; Jordan Lavender, “Paul and the Observance of the Torah by Gentiles,” Neotestamentica 57, no.2 (2023), 306; Troy W. Martin, “Pagan and Judeo-Christian Time-Keeping Schemes in Galatians 4:10 and Colossians 2:16,” in Theology and Practice in Early Christianity: Essays New and Old with Updated Reception Histories (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2020), 365–373; Brigitte Kahl, Galatians Re-Imagined: Reading with the Eyes of the Vanquished, Paul in Critical Contexts (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2010), 225; Dieter Georgi, The City in the Valley: Biblical Interpretation and Urban Theology, SBL 7 (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2005), 89; Graham N. Stanton, Jesus and Gospel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 41–43; Mark Nanos, The Irony of Galatians: Paul’s Letter in First-Century Context (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2002), 267–268. In Romans 15:5, the dispute over “days” likely pertains to traditional fast days or Roman festival days, not the biblical calendar. For the fast days view, see Beverly R. Gaventa, Romans: A Commentary (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2024), 387); Tim Hegg, Paul’s Epistle to the Romans: Chapters 9-16 (Tacoma, WA: TorahResource, 2007), 412–417; Raoul Dederen, “On Esteeming One Day Better Than Another – Romans 14:5,6,” AUSS 9 (1971), 30–31. For the view that the days in question were tied to Roman festival days, see Paul T. Sloan, Jesus and the Law of Moses: The Gospels and the Restoration of Israel within First-Century Judaism (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2025), 218n7; Aaron Eby, Biblically Kosher: A Messianic Jewish Perspective on Kashrut (Marshfield, MO: First Fruits of Zion, 2012), 60–61; D. Thomas Lancaster, From Sabbath to Sabbath: Returning the Holy Sabbath to the Disciples of Jesus (Marshfield, MO: First Fruits of Zion, 2016).
[2] John MacArthur, Colossians & Philemon, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary (Chicago: Moody, 1992), 119.
[3] MacArthur, Colossians & Philemon, 119.
[4] For a reading of this passage that concludes that Paul is not speaking against the biblical calendar, see, e.g., Brian L. Allen, “Removing an Arrow from the Supersessionist Quiver: A Post-Supersessionist Reading of Colossians 2:16–17,” JSPL 8 (2018), 127–146; Herold Weiss, A Day of Gladness: The Sabbath among Jews and Christians in Antiquity (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2003), 132–146; Troy Martin, By Philosophy and Empty Deceit: Colossians as Response to a Cynic Critique, JSNTSup 118 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1996). For a different approach that still concludes that Paul is not condemning the biblical calendar, see Lionel Windsor, Reading Ephesians & Colossians After Supersessionism: Christ’s Mission through Israel to the Nations (Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2017).
[5] See esp. Allen, “Removing an Arrow,” 138–140.
[6] A third possibility is that they were being criticized for how they observed them. As Troy Martin observes, “The function of this list is more difficult to ascertain. The Colossian author warns his readers not to permit anyone to criticize or judge them in regard to eating or drinking or in respect to a festival, a new moon, or Sabbaths. It is unclear as to whether these practices form the object or the basis of the opponents’ critique. The critics may condemn the Colossian Christians for engaging, not engaging, or engaging incorrectly in these practices. The function is ambiguous” (“Pagan and Judeo-Christian Time-Keeping Schemes,” 361).
[7] David Wilber, “A New Testament Case for Christian Sabbath Observance,” in An introduction to Pronomianism: Essays on One Torah theology in modern Christianity (Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company), 159–185. See also Benjamin Frostad, “He Made No Distinction: Gentiles and the Role of Torah in Acts 15” (MA Thesis, Briercrest Seminary, 2021), 64–79.
[8] Joshua W. Jipp, “The Paul of Acts: Proclaimer of the Hope of Israel or Teacher of Apostasy from Moses?” Novum Testamentum 62.1 (2020), 72. See also Isaac W. Oliver, “Acts Within Judaism,” in Within Judaism? Interpretive Trajectories in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam from the First to the Twenty-First Century, ed. Karin Hedner Zetterholm and Anders Runesson (Lanham, MD: Fortress Academic, 2024), 153–161; Mark S. Kinzer, Jerusalem Crucified, Jerusalem Risen: The Resurrected Messiah, the Jewish People, and the Land of Promise (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2018), 200–210; Dulcinea Boesenberg, “The Jewishness of the Way in Acts,” in Religion and Identity, ed. Ronald A. Simkins and Thomas M. Kelly, Journal of Religion & Society: Supplement Series 13 (Omaha, NE: Kripke Center, 2016), 58–72; David J. Rudolph, “Paul and the Torah According to Luke,” Kesher: A Journal of Messianic Judaism 14:1 (2002), 61–73.
[9] Jipp, “Luke’s view of Paul,” 63. See also Isaac W. Oliver, “The ‘Historical Paul’ and the Paul of Acts: Which Is More Jewish?” in Paul the Jew: Rereading the Apostle as a Figure of Second Temple Judaism, ed. Gabriele Boccaccini and Carlos A. Segovia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2016), 56; Isaac W. Oliver, Torah Praxis after 70 CE: Reading Matthew and Luke-Acts as Jewish Texts, WUNT II 355 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2013), 28; Jacob Jervell, “Sons of the Prophets: The Holy Spirit in the Acts of the Apostles,” in The Unknown Paul: Essays on Luke-Acts and Early Christian History (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1984), 117.
[10] Justin Hardin, Galatians and the Imperial Cult: A Critical Analysis of the First Century, WUNT II 237 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008), 120.
[11] See Jacob Jervell: “The references to the conversion of Gentiles speak mainly of ‘God-fearing’ Gentiles, who already are related to Israel and Judaism via the synagogue, though without being circumcised (13:43; 14:1; 17:4, 12). The passages show that Jewish and Gentile conversions have been so combined that both groups accept the gospel together” (Luke and the People of God: A New Look at Luke-Acts [Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing, 1972], 44).
[12] Frostad, “He Made No Distinction,” 112. See also Eyal Regev: “The implications [of Acts 15:21] are that since the Torah is proclaimed and studied in the synagogue on a regular basis, the God-fearing Christians would gain further knowledge and adhere to Jewish law after being accepted into the (Jewish-) Christian community. The legal obligations of the Apostolic Decree may have been an invitation to observe Jewish law” (“The Gradual Conversion of Gentiles in Acts and Luke’s Paradox of the Gentile Mission,” in Law and Narrative in the Bible and in Neighbouring Ancient Cultures, ed. F. Avemarie and K. P. Adams [Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2012], 361).
[13] David Rudolph, “The Celebration of Passover by Gentile Christians in the Patristic Period,” Verge 2:3 (2010), 4. See also Hardin, Galatians and the Imperial Cult, 121n15: “Paul’s statement assumes that the Corinthian church had learned the specific date of Passover, information they must have received from the synagogue authorities (cf. 1 Cor 5:8).”
[14] In the Septuagint, as well as in Philo and Josephus, this verb is consistently used to denote celebrating the biblical festivals (LXX Exod. 12:14; 23:14; Lev. 23:39, 41; Num. 29:12; Deut. 16:15; Zech 14:16, 18, 19; Philo, Special Laws 1.193; 2.41; Josephus, Ant. 20.133). See J. Brian Tucker: “The use of the term ‘festival’ (ἑορτάζω) in v. 8 implies that Paul is referring to a concrete event or celebration, rather than just a metaphorical or symbolic understanding of Passover. If Paul were only using Passover imagery as a rhetorical device, he might have chosen a different term or avoided mentioning a specific festival altogether” (1 Corinthians: A Social Identity Commentary [New York: T&T Clark, 2024], 130n9).
[15] Tucker, 1 Corinthians, 130n9.
[16] Martin, “Pagan and Judeo-Christian Time-Keeping Schemes,” 364.
[17] Translated by Arthur Cushman McGillert.
[18] Allen also cites evidence from the Didache. See Allen, “Removing an Arrow,” 134–135.
[19] Allen, “Removing an Arrow,” 132. See also Lavender: “Paul did not oppose these practices and likely encouraged his followers to observe these commandments as well” (“Paul and the Observance of the Torah,” 306).
[20] Weiss, A Day of Gladness, 132.
[21] Allen, “Removing an Arrow,” 137.
[22] Weiss, A Day of Gladness, 133. Weiss adds, “they are formulations of human precepts and doctrines. They do not have a divine origin. Given this description of the regulations the Colossians have adopted, it is impossible to say that they come from the Torah” (132).
[23] See Martin, By Philosophy and Empty Deceit, 65–67: “Cynics practice an extreme asceticism that not only forbids eating but also touching or handling commodities not naturally produced. Cynics divide all consumer goods into durable and non-durable (perishable) commodities. The durable goods are those produced naturally by the processes of nature. These goods are sufficiently and consistently supplied to meet human need. Non-durable goods are those that depend upon human skill and civilization for their production. These goods are limited by the extent of human labor, and their supply may be disrupted by cessation of human effort, war or embargo. Durable goods are close at hand and easily obtained; non-durable goods are not easily accessible. The former consumer goods are permitted; the latter are prohibited according to Cynic teaching. Consequently, Cynics reject non-durable goods like wine, cakes and gourmet foods as well as clothes, shoes and houses. Durable commodities permit them to drink water, eat natural foods, go barefoot, sleep on the ground and wear only a single cloak.”
[24] Abraham Malherbe, trans. The Cynic Epistles (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1977), 64–65. See also Crates, Epistle 18; Diogenes, Epistle 37.
[25] Troy W. Martin, “The covenant of circumcision (Genesis 17:9–14) and the situational antitheses in Galatians 3:28,” in Theology and practice in early Christianity: Essays new and old with updated reception histories (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2020), 193.
[26] Martin, By Philosophy and Empty Deceit, 131–132.
[27] “You find fault with my way of life on the grounds that it is toilsome and will be cultivated by no one because of its austerity. But I purposely increased its intensity, so that whoever imitates me might know not to enjoy any luxury at all” (Diogenes, Epistle 14; Malherbe, 108–109); “Take care of your soul, but take care of the body only to the degree that necessity requires, and of externals not even that much. For happiness is not pleasure, on account of which we need externals, while virtue is complete without any externals” (Crates, Epistle 3; Malherbe, 54–55); “It is not because we are indifferent to everything that others have called our philosophy Cynic, but because we robustly endure those things which are unbearable to them because they are effeminate or subject to false opinion. It is for this latter reason and not the former that they have called us Cynics. Stand fast, therefore, and live the Cynic life with us” (Crates, Epistle 29; Malherbe, 78–79).
[28] Even if one sees the opponents as promoting the observance of festivals, new moons, and Sabbaths, this does not necessarily mean they were judging Paul’s readers for neglecting these observances entirely. It is possible that their criticism focused on how these observances were being practiced. As Martin (“Pagan and Judeo-Christian Time-Keeping Schemes,” 361) points out, “The critics may condemn the Colossian Christians for engaging, not engaging, or engaging incorrectly in these practices.” If we assume Paul’s opponents adhered to the biblical calendar, they may have viewed the Colossian believers as improperly observing it—much like the Pharisees who criticized Jesus and his disciples for actions they deemed unlawful on the Sabbath (Matt. 12:2), even though, from Jesus’ perspective, those actions were entirely lawful (Matt. 12:7, 11).
[29] Martin, “Pagan and Judeo-Christian Time-Keeping Schemes,” 365.
[30] See MacArthur, Colossians & Philemon, 118: “The false teachers’ prohibitions about food and drink were probably based on the Old Testament dietary laws.”
[31] Weiss, A Day of Gladness, 132.
[32] Allen, “Removing an Arrow,” 136. See also Martin, “But Let Everyone Discern the body of Christ (Colossians 2:17)” in Theology and Practice in Early Christianity: Essays New and Old with Updated Reception Histories (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2020), 223; Eduard Lohse, Colossians and Philemon, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971), 115n4; G. Scott McKenzie, Walking Orderly, Keeping the Law: A Pronomian Pocket Guide to Acts 21:20–26 (Cover, SC: Pronomian Publishing, 2024), 80.
[33] Allen, “Removing an Arrow,” 137.
[34] Allen, “Removing an Arrow,” 146.
[35] Martin, “But Let Everyone Discern,” 238–239. See also Weiss, A Day of Gladness, 134–135; Allen, “Removing an Arrow,” 138–139.
[36] Martin, “But Let Everyone Discern,” 241.
[37] Weiss, A Day of Gladness, 136.
[38] Allen, “Removing an Arrow,” 139–140.
[39] Weiss, A Day of Gladness, 136.
[40] Weiss, A Day of Gladness, 136.
[41] Weiss, A Day of Gladness, 136. Some may argue that the “shadow” metaphor is meant to be construed negatively based on the author of Hebrews use of a similar expression (“a shadow of the good things to come”) to highlight the superiority of the Messiah’s sacrifice over the sacrifices prescribed in the Torah. However, affirming the superiority of the greater reality over the shadow does not amount to denying the worth of the shadow. As David M. Moffitt observes, “the author’s arguments about the Law’s limited powers of purification do not support the further inference that he rejects entirely sacrificial ritual and external purification, replacing or superseding them with something wholly other, something inimical to the Levitical rituals” (“Weak and Useless? Purity, the Mosaic Law, and Perfection in Hebrews,” in Law and Lawlessness in Early Judaism and Early Christianity, ed. David Lincicum, Ruth Sheridan, and Charles Stang [Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2019], 91).
[42] For a grammatical analysis of this passage that suggests an alternative translation, see Allen, “Removing an Arrow,” 141–145; Troy W. Martin, “But Let Everyone Discern the Body of Christ’ (Colossians 2:17),” JBL 114.2 (1995), 249–255. According to Allen and Martin, Paul is not contrasting σῶμα with σκιά. Instead, the antithesis is, “let no one judge you...but [let everyone judge/discern/consider] the body of Christ.” In this case, the implied verb in the final clause is “judge,” with the subject being “everyone,” serving as a counterpart to “no one” in verse 16. If this translation is correct, Paul is telling his readers not to worry about the criticisms of their detractors, but instead to discern or perceive the body of Christ—namely, Christ’s resurrected body, the basis of their hope for the future.
[43] Eby, Biblically Kosher, 51.
[44] McKenzie, Walking Orderly, 82.
About David Wilber
David Wilber is an author, Bible teacher, and CEO of Pronomian Publishing LLC. He has written several books and numerous theological articles, with his work appearing in outlets such as the Christian Post and the Journal of Biblical Theology. David has spoken at churches and conferences across the nation and has served as a researcher and Bible teacher for a number of Messianic and Christian ministries…