I watched the video.
Firstly, he tries to connect this issue with the NIV. Regardless of what translation you read it in, the issue still remains. I personally use the ESV and the meaning is clear. Even with his rendering, there is not a reason to think that sabbathkeeping is required of Christians. His assertion that these verses require festival observance runs counter to the clear teaching that the Old Covenant is obsolete.
In addition, his false assumption is that it's an either/or situation. The heretics are either talking about Greek philosophy, or they are talking about Judaizing. He eliminates the possibility that the heretics have a combination of both false teachings.
The overall message of Colossians 2 is that believers are complete in Christ, and don't need to follow the teachings of these heretics to approach God. They didn't need any secret knowledge provided by these false teachers. They already had this knowledge in Christ (v. 1-4). Notice how the believers were "filled" or "complete" in Him (v. 10). Notice how they were spiritually circumcised("without hands"), by putting off the body of flesh, through him (v.11). Notice how we are made alive in Him through his death, burial and resurrection (v. 12-15).
You should notice the repetitive use of "in him" in this part of the chapter. The message was that the Colossians were already complete in Christ. They didn't need to be physically circumcised, and they didn't need any special spiritual knowledge offered by those claiming special insight in order to approach Christ.
By the way, my understanding is that you do believe you need to be physically circumcised, and that Hebrew Roots teachers are into asserting themselves as masters of the faith which you must turn to in order to properly approach God, so I would suggest that their approach is like what the Colossians were being warned about.
If one views Colossians 2:16-17 in light of the fact that the preceding verses are talking about our completeness in Christ, as well as the following verses, one can see that these heretical teachers were attempting to bring the Colossians under control of their teachings. Part of their teachings included observance of the weekly Sabbath, Holy Days, and New Moons.
Notice that these heretical teachers were attempting to restrict their behavior, and to bring the believers under control, all throughout the chapter. They were trying to enforce regulations upon them which didn't apply as they were already complete in Christ. So, for Paul to mention the Sabbath, Holy Days, and Festivals as binding and required right in the middle of this context does not make sense. These teachers were trying to restrict behavior, not tell them they didn't have to do certain things anymore. Paul, on the other hand, was showing them that they were complete in Christ and did not have to approach God in this way, through asceticism, legalism, and all kinds of rules and regulations.
The context and behavior of these false teachers simply does not fit the assertion that Paul was claiming they needed to keep the Sabbath, Holy Days, and festivals. These teachers were being restrictive.
Another faulty argument he made was that the Gnostics were against the Holy Days due to eating and drinking, but only the Feast of Tabernacles involved eating more than normal. In fact, the Day of Atonement involves fasting.
The guy in the video also acts as though Paul's focus was on the law of God, which is not true. His focus was on Jesus Christ and placing your faith in him. That is a fundamental error of legalism. The gospel becomes all about the Law, and Christ and salvation through him is virtually ignored.
The guy in the video said that it was easily concluded by most that the Gnostics were the ones telling the Colossians not to keep the feast days. Virtually no one but legalists would say that is a true statement. He simply misrepresented the majority of Christianity with that remark.
Here's another thing..why do they use the word Yeshua instead of Jesus? Jesus is a more proper rendering of the Greek, and the New Testament was not written in Hebrew. There is nothing pagan about the word Jesus.
Also, if these guys are teaching that physical circumcision is required, they are in very clear and direct opposition to Scripture.
Eliwood, here's the thing I want to challenge you with. Is the focus of ministries like 119ministries about Jesus Christ and him crucified, or is it about the Law? Do you even understand the message of the gospel? I do not think you have a good understanding of the gospel. I really want to challenge yourself in that regard. The fact that you spit upon the concept of grace is not a sign that you've been deeply affected by the fact that you are a sinner by nature, and that you understand your sins, and that you have asked for the application of Christ's sacrifice to them and have received that forgiveness. A person who has done this shouldn't be spitting on God's grace like I've seen you do.
I would also say, in regards to Colossians 2, that even if they aren't so clear to you, you still can't get past the fact that the Old Covenant was between God and Israel, not God and Christians. The Sabbath is part of the Old Covenant. The Old Covenant applies to no one today. Therefore the Sabbath applies to no one today. I have provided adequate Scriptures in regards to that so I won't bother repeating them again.
.
