[It's really just as simple as that - go preach it somewhere other than here.]

Hello DJConklin,

Just bluntly, nobody here would be interested if you spent several lifetimes in trying to justify a false doctrine given by a false prophetess in the 1800s. The amount of time you spent is not material, as the end result is still false. We have tried to be kind to followers of Ellen G. White, and the result was the spouting of more weird and wild doctrine about the Mark of the Beast being people going to church on Sunday. It accomplished nothing but divisions between Brothers and Sisters in Christ and disruption on the forum.

We have several lengthy debate threads on the forum already, and we could really care less what day of the week you go to church. If you want to talk about JESUS, that's fine. If you want to preach the one-track mind false doctrine of false prophetess Ellen G. White, you can do that somewhere other than here. It's really just as simple as that - go preach it somewhere other than here.

Moderator

Apparently I wasn't very clear in my previous posts. Allow me to try again.

1) I do NOT use Ellen G. White on ANY Biblical text.
2) I did NOT bring up Ellen G. White.
3) My original post was based solely on the Greek that Paul wrote. I wanted to have a dialogue on that text alone.  I can understand why some people would not want to look too closely at it--several web sites that I contacted disappeared shortly afterwards.
4) I have no evidence that Ellen G. White even knew koine Greek; I doubt it very highly.
5) I didn't bring up any of the items you mentioned in the above.
6) I never even checked to see what Ellen G. White wrote about Col. 2:16-7 lest anyone assume that I was subconsciously influenced by what she wrote.

So, please let's not bring up Ellen G. White again.  I didn't and I don't want to.

On second thought, given the title of thread, perhaps we should look closer at Ellen G. White. Would you like to try the plagiarism claim?

No I don't want your bibliography. As for the evidence it has already been presented here many times in this thread and in others on this subject. It is not a debateable subject here or in email.

I understand completely.  Could you direct me to where Col. 2:16-17 has been examined?  I'd love to see what evidence was brought forward.

Your post is clearly in support of the teachings of the sabbath keeping an E.G. White teaching. It is a misconstrued version of the meanings of the verse that you mentioned.

I think I see where the misunderstanding has come in.

You will note that I never referred to any of EGW's books; I never refer to any of EGW's books when dealing with Scripture (her work is more homelitical in nature while mine is exegetical).

In looking at the meaning of these two verses I spent three years and looked at about 250 web pages, commentaries and lexicons to understand what they said (would you like a copy of my bibliography?).

My understanding of these two verses is solidly based on scholarship of the highest order.  In fact, one gentleman who was working on his doctorate on the entire book of Colossians said that he felt I was "the only one who had it right".

If I am wrong on any point I heartily welcome having you present the evidence (maybe a different thread or via email?) where I am in error and then I'll make the necessary corrections.

It is obvious that you did not read the rest of the above posts. These teachings are against scripture and as such will not be allowed on Christians Unite.

If I am understanding you correctly I am truly shocked!

All I did is refer to the Greek text that Paul wrote and show how one translation on two verses messed up--are you saying that's against the rules?  Don't all pastors show their congregations where translators (being human) made a mistake?

If I haven't misunderstood you please show me the specific rule I violated and exactly how I violated it so I don't do it again.

>The use of  electricity causes labour.

The electricity is there whether or not you actually use it.

I would think that God would require us to use common sense in deciding what constitutes work and what does not.

>Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day -- things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ.

This is a poor translation on a number of grounds.

1) It has been noted that the Greek "brosei kai en posei" are "action nouns" and should be translated as "in eating and in drinking".   There are no drink laws so the text is not talking about someone being judged by what they were drinking.
2) The Greek "en merei" that is translated as "in respect to" actually means "in part of" as older English translations and scholars will tell you in their commentaries.
3) The Greek word "heorte" translated here as "festival" actually means "feast".  It has been noted that in the KJV it translates this word correctly everywhere but here.
4) The word "a" before "Sabbath day" is supplied and obscures the fact that the Greek here is in the plural.  After having looked at all the texts that are relevant to this verse (I spent three years and looked at about 250 sources: web sites, commentaries and lexicons) the word "sabbaths" here refers to the day of Atonement and the feast of Trumpets--both are days of fasting and so could not be included under the word "feast".
5) The last phrase would more literally and correctly be translated as "but the  body of Christ".  It has been noted that this is the positive counter to "let no man judge".

In short, this verse does not condemn keeping the seventh-day Sabbath because it isn't even in view here. Secondly, the believers at Colossae were being judged by outsiders for something they were doing: "eating and drinking" on the days that are then mentioned.  The ascetic critics were trying to convince the believers that they should deny their bodies and fast on the days that are mentioned if they wanted to have a closer experience with God.  Paul wrote showing that the all-sufficiency of Christ exceeds all man-made rules and regulations.