Your article on the Sabbath has all the hallmarks of false teaching
Question:
I stumbled on your article about Sabbath and was left speechless. The article "Was Paul a Sabbath Keeper?" had all the hallmarks of a person more determined to twist the Scriptures in a classic example of "But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." (Mathew 15:9).
I have also taken note that the very absurd, radical, and false teachings against the Sabbath, the 4th Commandment, and the 7th day of the week, and in defense of Sunday, the 1st day of the week, come from people affiliated with "Church of Christ", which raises many questions. The article is false; your argument against Sabbath reeks of poor Bible study. Your understanding of Colossians 2:16-17 also explains your eisegesis — interpreting the verses (text) by reading your own ideas, biases, and assumptions into them rather than drawing meaning from the text. Do you know there are many sabbaths but only one Sabbath? Even Jesus was crucified just a few hours before one of those sabbaths. Do you know there were other laws being kept by Jews that were known as Ceremonial Laws? Do you know the difference between Ceremonial Laws, Civil Laws, and the Decalogue?
The grace of Christ, His death and resurrection, saves us. Simply put, it pays the penalty of our sin, secures forgiveness for us from God, restores the lost fellowship between God and man, and we become a new creation in Christ. As a saved person, you don't sin, and what is sin? "Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth against also the law: for sin is transgression of the law" (1 John 3:4). The first sin (by Adam and Eve) was the sin of disobedience; any truly born-again believer will NEVER have a problem in being obedient to God's law. Believers are NOT obligated to keep the new moon festivals, holidays, and sabbaths of the ancient Jews because those were specific to their culture as a people, but the 10 Commandments transcends Jews and defines God's constitution and one can't claim to have an issue with one part of the Commandments while pretending to keep another for Sabbath is the 4th and "Do not commit adultery" is the 7th, so think why you are so vehement in arguing against one while pretending to uphold the other. (see James 2:10).
May God's grace locate you and open your eyes, ears, mind, and heart that you may know "the grace of God in truth" (Colossians 1:5-6).
Answer:
Sadly, you mistakenly think that assertions are somehow proof. All you have accomplished is to declare your rejection of the arguments made by Benard Kagaga. You failed to prove that his arguments are flawed.
You claim the Scriptures were twisted, but never show how they were twisted or how they should be properly read.
You argue against the source, but that doesn't mean the article's discussion is wrong.
I'm puzzled by your argument about the number of Sabbaths. In Colossians 2:16, "Sabbaths" is in the plural. I suspect that "The Sabbath as a Type" addresses your attempt at an argument.
Would you like to cite where God says His Law was divided into the Decalogue, ceremonial, and civil laws? This argument is addressed in "Law of God and Law of Moses: Are They the Same?" and "Were the Colossians being told not to worry about being condemned for keeping the Sabbath?"
Your argument that Christians never sin contradicts what John wrote: "If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us. My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous" (I John 1:8-2:1).
Your final point, claiming that adultery is only condemned because it is condemned in the Ten Commandments, is proven wrong in "What about the Ten Commandments?"
