This a reply to Rob Skiba’s Facebook note: Twisting and Distorting Colossians 2. The problem is that Skiba is simply uninformed and incorrect. In Colossians, Paul is addressing a situation quite similar to Skiba’s own “ministry” that also asserts New Covenant believers need concern themselves with the obsolete Mosaic covenant stipulations (Hebrews 8:13). Despite his special pleading, historians and biblical scholars universally agree that the dangerous teaching at Colossae was heavily steeped in Jewish customs. Recent President of the Evangelical Theological Society, Clinton Arnold of Talbot School of Theology and Biola University, observes, “The fact that there are many distinctively Jewish elements to the false teaching (such as Sabbath observance, Jewish festivals, and an interest in angels; see 2:16–18) has led a number of scholars to contend that the competing teaching had something to do with Judaism”[1] Arnold continues, “The best explanation for this dangerous teaching is that it comes from the context of the local Jewish and pagan folk belief.” [2] He believes a charismatic leader attracted a following and was presenting himself as a guide to the “true Christianity” which included Jewish customs, feasts, and Sabbath keeping (remind you of anyone?).
Thus, the excuse that folks who cite Colossians 2:16 against Skiba’s Judaizing heresy is some sort of “bible twisting” is completely spurious. It is also instructive that the only people who make such a claim are folks like Jim Staley and Michael Rood who are also deeply invested in Hebrew Roots teaching. Real biblical scholars, steeped in study of the historical context, univocally identify it in a Judaizing context. For example, Robert Wall writes:
Several scholars have recently concluded that the clipped references in Colossians (cf. 2:9, 18, 21, 23) to a “hollow and deceptive philosophy” that “depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world” (2:8) to fashion “fine-sounding arguments” (2:4) suggest that the Colossian congregation was being influenced by a Hellenized form of piety (Francis 1975), probably of Jewish origin (Bornkamm 1975). If to be a Christian meant in some important sense to be Jewish, as opponents to the Gentile mission would have argued, then believers would quite naturally look to their Jewish-Christian teachers (perhaps even to the rabbinate of the local synagogue) for instruction. [3]
Indeed, this sounds very much like Skiba’s teaching that to be Christian means to keep the Jewish feasts, dietary restrictions and Sabbath observance. Now that the context is clear, let’s examine the passage.
Skiba argues that the passage is teaching believers not to let pagans judge them for doing the things of God. But the passage actually says “let no one pass judgement on you” not just pagans. Thus, the passage teaches do not let Rob Skiba imply you will be a “janitor in heaven” for not keeping the feasts. Many similar HRM teachers seem to operate under the delusion that the festivals mentioned in Colossians were not the typical Jewish feasts but no historian will support that contention. It’s just a manufactured excuse for the HRM error. While in English translation it is easy to generalize a term like “festival” and then assert it was some unknown pagan festival, the original text is crystal clear. The Greek term used is ἑορτή transliterated heortē and below is a snip of the Lexham Greek-English Septuagint which verifies that the term ἑορτήis used in Leviticus 23.
More pertinent to the discussion at hand, ἑορτή appears 25 times in 23 verses of the New Testament. A few examples include:
- “But they said, “Not during the feast, lest there be an uproar among the people” (Mt 26:5).
- “Now the Feast of Unleavened Bread drew near, which is called the Passover”(Lk 22:1).
- “Now when he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Feast, many believed in his name when they saw the signs that he was doing” (Jn 2:23).
- “Now the Passover, the feast of the Jews, was at hand” (Jn 6:4).
- “Now the Jews’ Feast of Booths was at hand” (Jn 7:2).
Indeed, without exception the term heortē is used to denote the Jewish feasts in the New Testament. Skiba has not provided one shred of historical evidence that it meant anything different in Colossians: “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” (Col 2:16).
The fact of the matter is that no one outside the Hebrew Roots Movement agrees with Rob Skiba and Jim Staley. Again scholars are univocal. Arnold comments, “The false teacher(s) were advocating a number of Jewish observances, arguing that they were essential for spiritual advancement”[4] Wall’s comment is particularly instructive:
The list of these celebrations, which includes a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day, is fairly typical (compare Hos 2:13; Ezek 45:17; Jubilees 1:14). Since the list encompasses annual festivals (such as Passover or Yom Kippur), monthly meetings (such as the New Moon celebration) and the weekly observance of sabbath, it is evident that Paul’s opponents required a rather comprehensive obligation. Moreover, within Judaism most of these celebrations were intended to help the community look forward to Messiah’s deliverance of Israel from its suffering and to its entrance into God’s promised shalom. Thus, for the Christian to participate in these Jewish celebrations was tantamount to a denial of Jesus’ messiahship. [5]
That last line brings this Judaizing heresy into sharp focus and ought to bring deceived Christians still amongst Skiba’s following to heartfelt repentance. This is not a trivial error, especially now that one has been made aware of its depth into apostasy.
[1] Clinton E. Arnold, “Colossians” in The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2290.
[2] Arnold, “Colossians,” 2290.
[3]Robert W. Wall, Colossians & Philemon, The IVP New Testament commentary series (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1993), Col 1:1.
[4] Arnold, “Colossians,” 2297.
[5]Wall, Colossians & Philemon, Col 2:18.
About Cris Putnam
Yes, it is easy to discount this teaching on the surface because the bible SEEMS to say what we have all believed in evangelical christianity for years. But what if we’re misunderstanding?
1. If the Word of YHVH (Torah/writings/prophets) all proclaim the Messiah to come, and we read in Deut 13, 17, 18 that if anyone comes claiming to be speaking for YHVH but brings a different message, then even Y’shua would be disqualified if He taught anything else…..such as lawlessness. We know in fact, that He did not since He emphatically stated such in Matthew 5.
2. If Paul, claiming to be speaking for YHVH, brought a different message, such as “it’s okay to be lawless now”, he would have been subject to the same judgment spoken of in Deut 13, 17 and 18.
3. WHEN Paul was accused of teaching lawlessness (or against keeping the commands of Torah), he was found not guilty. He even went so far as to prove it outwardly by a vow, sacrificing, traveling to Jerusalem for the Feasts. Paul tells us himself that he keeps the laws of Torah. Peter tells us that Paul’s letters are being distorted and are hard to understand for some.
4. The only “scriptures” that are being referenced as “god breathed and profitable for reproof, rebuke, encouragement and training in righteousness”, is the Torah/writings/prophets, ie Tanak, Old Testament. No one grabbed their New Testament and taught lawlessness.
5. The only “scriptures” that the Bereans searched to see whether Paul was teaching accurately, was also the Tanak or Old Testament. No letters were being canonized and circulated as a new message. The good news is that Messiah has come! And the scriptures declared he would!
6. Y’shua told the Pharisees that if they had believed Moses (another way of saying “if you believe the scriptures) you would believe Me because Moses wrote about Me. In other words, no one can believe Y’shua, who He is and what He came to do, unless they know Moses, ie: Torah. Y’shua is what all scripture is pointing toward. He IS TORAH in the flesh.
7. Paul wrote to the Colossians from the standpoint of teaching Torah. Anything else (like the doctrine we have today) would be the deception. You must KNOW the foundation first before you can understand. But the clues are all there if you will search. To say that we are now without Torah, is to find so many contradictions in scripture they cannot be reconciled. Even Paul goes on to say that we “establish the law”. Most often, Paul is misunderstood because he is speaking about the doctrines of men that are done away with (talmud). You have to make clear distinctions between a law that man made (like Y’shua broke all the time) and a law that is eternal (Torah).
My point is that we’ve misunderstood. Stop for a minute and realize what I just wrote. Look deeply into these matters with the help of the Holy Spirit and He will open your eyes. How many times in the “new” testament does it say that to love YHVH is to keep THE COMMANDMENTS (Torah)? No one walked in lawlessness. Paul certainly did not. Peter did not. Even Peter reaffirms the command to keep the Sabbath just as Y’shua did. Every one of those guys lived, breathed, walked and taught Torah.
As for the Feasts, the reason we do not celebrate is because there is no Temple and Levitical priesthood. The commands to celebrate center around both at “the place He put His Name” and no other place is to be recognized. Both commands are in scripture. Do it only here……..don’t do it anywhere else. The Hebrew Roots movement has it wrong on this subject.
Bottom line? Get out of the churches that teach lawlessness, open your bible and read what your Father wrote to you. You will not be able to say “but my preacher told me so” on the day of judgment.
jmvpho how do you explain that Paul calls those same commandments the “ministry of death?”
“Now if the ministry of death, carved in letters on stone, came with such glory that the Israelites could not gaze at Moses’ face because of its glory, which was being brought to an end,” (2 Co 3:7)
Great question. When we read statements like this (and this isn’t the only one) we have a dilemma don’t we? If you read Psalm 119 as well as many other passages, you read about a PERFECT Torah, an eternal one, one that brings life, not death. So we have a HUGE contradiction. Are we going to believe Paul or YHVH? Are they truly saying something opposite? Because if they are, something is wrong.
Before reconciling that scripture, I urge you to go back and build a foundation. Answer the questions written above. Did Paul uphold, live and teach Torah? Was he found to have “no fault” in teaching anyone to be lawless? Can you find even one disciple that did not keep the Sabbath or eating unclean things or breaking any other commandment or teaching anyone else to break one? If you find the answer to these questions and then study the other passages I offered (spoken by Peter and about the Bereans), you will conclude that something is really amiss in our evangelical teaching.
So with that in mind, and knowing your Heavenly FAther “changes not” and His Word is written in stone and His word was made flesh and His Word fulfilled (lived out as an example) all of Torah, what is the possible answer to your question?
My opinion is that it is telling us that the stone tablets will kill. They bring only death. Apart from the tablet (Word) appearing in the flesh and atoning for sin, we are left with only a law that will condemn all of us. However, when we recognize Messiah (the passage that I wrote above where Y’shua told the Pharisees that the reason they didn’t recognize Him was because they didn’t believe Moses), YHVH places His Torah on our hearts. The Spirit of the law brings life. It establishes the law. The law is not nailed to the cross. The ordinances of men were nailed to the cross. Remember, if there is no law, there is no sin because the only biblical definition of sin is “lawlessness”. If there is no sin, there is no need to repent. And I urge NO ONE to test this theory.
Go back and audit what you’ve accepted as truth. Really take a unbiased look at scripture without the need to prove your hypothesis. Find the contradictions and focus on them. Ask your Father for the reconciliation between the left side of the book and the right because they are seamless. There is no “new” testament. There is simply a wonderful and beautiful and life changing fulfillment of what was always the plan, the gospel written throughout Torah.
You are simply uninformed about the New Covenant. The Mosaic covenant is OBSOLETE: “In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.” (Heb 8:13) The “first one” is necessarily the Mosaic, so it is no longer binding on anyone.
You are also under the wrong impression here because of your failure to grasp the New Covenant.
Jesus fulfilled the law so I do not have to. And while God does not change the law certainly did according to scripture.
Because you have neglected the New Covenant you have erroneously put your self under the law which tramples the Gospel under foot and severs you from Christ. Do not submit yourself to such a yoke of slavery. No one is justified by the law.
Hey Chris.
Hebrews is talking about how does the nation of Israel make atonement for the sin of themselves and the nations in the wake of the destruction of the Temple. You may argue that Hebrews wasn’t written after the destruction of the Temple. Even if that were the case, Josephus describes the repeatedly dismal failures of the Yom Kippur service from Jesus’ Resurrection until it’s destruction, therefore the writer was elucidating the progression from an earthly service to the heavenly, of which the earthly is just a shadow, through the atoning blood of Yehovah’s salvation upon the mercy seat.
As Job states in his time:
9:27 If I say, ‘I will forget my complaint, I will put off my sad face, and be of good cheer,’
28 I become afraid of all my suffering, for I know you will not hold me innocent.
29 I shall be condemned; why then do I labor in vain?
30 If I wash myself with snow and cleanse my hands with lye,
31 yet you will plunge me into a pit, and my own clothes will abhor me.
32 For he is not a man, as I am, that I might answer him, that we should come to trial together.
33 There is no arbiter between us, who might lay his hand on us both.
34 Let him take his rod away from me, and let not dread of him terrify me.
35 Then I would speak without fear of him, for I am not so in myself.
This is hinting at the need for the Godman to make intercession on the part of the sons of Adam, as a kinsmen redeemer (no doubt you are well aware of this).
1John 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
Therefore what is the scope and magnitude of this change/deletion in the law (or better translated) – instructions? Surely it is not those instructions that make one set apart. You may argue that calling Jesus your Lord and thus believing in the God of Abraham sanctifies one in this age of godlessness (and you would be right) for the just shall live by faith, but to call a return or repentance to what Yehovah calls holiness and as an apostasy is a gross miscalculation.
Chris,
as a student of the Word, we must be very very very careful how we handle scripture. Hebrews 8:13 doesn’t even contain the word “covenant” but that word was added by a translator. James’ comment above is correct. The subject matter is the priesthood from the 7th chapter, not the covenant between YHVH and man.
Paul is very careful to explain to us the OPPOSITE of what you just wrote and what this translator wrote inaccurately.
Gal 3:15…Just as no one can set aside or add to a human covenant that has been duly established, so it is in this case. 16 The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” meaning one person, who is Christ. 17 What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. 18 For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on the promise.
Again, with what you wrote above, you have a HUGE dilemma. You have yet another contradiction out of the mouth of Y’shua who said that the law, not one jot or tittle, will pass away until heaven and earth do. Who are you going to believe? Which theory are you willing to test?
I think you should read the new covenant a little more carefully. Does it say that the law is obsolete?
Can you find anywhere, that Y’shua told us that He “fulfilled the law, so we don’t have to”? I think you better go back and read His letters in Revelation. If we are not expected to OBEY, then those churches were chastised for nothing. The only conclusion you can come to when you realize we are to obey is “obey what”? THE COMMANDMENTS…………..maybe you should actual go and count the times this is instructed to us in the NEW testament.
No one is arguing that we are saved by works (our obedience). Can we put that to rest and get beyond it? If we are saved by obedience, then even one infraction condemns us. Now tell me who that would condemn? Everyone. And seems to me that only One, would be adequate in FULFILLING that requirement, right? But a true child of the King who has been born again, now has “something”, “somewhere” (read new covenant). What might that be? Where might that be?
Jam 2:14 What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? 17…faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.
18 But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.” Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds. 19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.
20 YOU FOOLISH PERSON, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? 21 Was not our father Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? 22 You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. 23 And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,” and he was called God’s friend. 24 You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone.
AND CHRIS, unless you are found righteous, by your obedience to align yourself with Torah, you are a liar and true SAVING FAITH is not in you. Now I didn’t say this, the bible does! But if I were you, I would stop dead in my tracks and search out these contradictions to make sense of the Truth before going any further. If you continue to teach lawlessness, you come under grave judgment AND you have blood on your hands.
Rom 8:7 The mind governed by the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law(Torah), nor can it do so.
1Jn 2:4 Whoever says, “I know Him,”but does not do what He commands is a liar, and the truth is not in that person.
jmvphoh when you say Torah are you referring just to the 5 books of Moses or the entire old testament or just to a specific part of the first 5 books of Moses? Jesus did not keep the Sabbath that the Pharisees kept and Paul made it clear that it was wrong to ask the gentiles to get circumcised. Paul also rebuked Peter for separating himself from the gentiles in eating when the judaizers were around. Paul’s emphasis was on being in spirit, setting the mind on the spirit and walking in and according to the spirit. When a believer is living in the spirit he cannot sin and will not break any of the 10 commandments, but a believer living in the flesh sins automatically because the flesh is at enmity with the spirit. Thankfully, we can confess our sins and God is faithful and righteous to forgive us. In the new testament Jesus summarized the law into loving God and loving one another. John said if you don’t love your brother you walk in darkness. So jmvphoh, when you say one must fully align themselves to Torah, I’m just not sure what you mean. Paul may have tried to make a vow, but Titus wasn’t even allowed in the temple and could not have even attempted to keep the law in that kind of way. Personally I believe Paul was wrong in trying to make a vow according to those old testament practices and God would not allow it. I don’t believe we are to try to keep all of the ordinances in the old testament today. Besides the Sabbath and circumcision, God also has made all foods clean.
When I say Torah, I mean what we call the old testament or what is the summary of first 5 books, the writings and the prophets. And there is no where in scripture that you will find Y’shua breaking one of YHVH’s commandments. He would not be a sinless Messiah. But He did break man’s commandments (talmud) all the time and intentionally.
You will also find no commandment to call a gentile “turning to YHVH” unclean…but you will find that law in the Talmud, again man’s words. As well, if you read the left side of the book, you find that when there is no temple, altar and Levitical priesthood, then all of the commandments that have to do with these things are forbidden to be done. Why? Because you cannot make just anyone into a Levite (read about Jeraboam’s sin), you cannot sacrifice anywhere you want, and you can only bring your tithes, make your vows, bring your sacrifices and celebrate the Feasts at the temple in Jerusalem. While in captivity, this cannot be done and Jer 17:4 tells us it is discontinued.
But the discontinuation was sovereignly done and not until a full generation (40 yrs) after Messiah’s death. We do in fact, read about the disciples keeping the commands and teaching others to keep them. Paul said so. Paul was accused, just like you are accusing him, of teaching this and was found not guilty.
As for circumcision, the desire of YHVH has always been a circumcised heart and not flesh. Just like baptism is about the heart and not about the physical act. In both cases, the physical act means nothing if not spiritually proved. Remember that Paul circumcised Timothy right after the Jerusalem council met.
btw, why would the Jerusalem council say “no” to circumcision but then go on to give a list of 4 things to be done as well as reminding everyone that they’ll get the rest of Torah “when Moses is read” (on Sabbath)?
As for what YHVH declared clean/unclean, you might want to get inside the mind of a first century person reading or writing a letter. If it is unclean, it is NOT, nor never will be “food”. You are incorrect. Peter never got that memo. Peter’s vision was about PEOPLE, not animals. Read Isaiah 66 if you don’t believe me.
The answer is perhaps best given in 1 Corinthians 9:20-23 (emphasis added):
To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.
Paul understood, as did Peter (See Acts 10 and Cornelius), that they were no longer bound by the Jewish law. Peter saw that he should no longer call unclean what God considered clean. This specifically included pork and unclean animals. So that vision was connotative, to be taken literally and figuratively. God wouldn’t use animals in the vision only to say that the animals themselves do not apply. Afterall, He made everything clean!!
So, before God, Timothy did not need to be circumcised. However, if your target audience involves Jews, to whom the “uncircumcised” were deplorable, then it is appropriate to be circumcised for the sake of the hearers. Paul said that he became as Jew to win the Jews. He became weak to win the weak, etc.
Hudson Taylor followed this example as a missionary in China as he donned the clothing and hair style of the Chinese, thereby identifying with them culturally.
So, again, it is appropriate to not offend those with whom you wish to share the gospel, so that what is unimportant does not become an unnecessary stumbling block to your hearers.
I agree that we are not to be under Jewish law, as Paul say, but still same Paul say that he have the Law of Christ. What is that Law? It is the Law of God. See John 7:16-17.
Peter’s vision refers to humans not animals. See Acts 10:28.
There are aspect referring to the cultures of the jews or of the greeks, and than there are God’s commandments included in God Law. That is the same for everyone.
Great work, Cris! I really appreciate how you contend for the faith and take a stand against false teachings. I used to follow Skiba’s teachings, until I realized he supports the teachings of119 Ministries, who also teach that we as Christians have to observe the feasts.
Keep up the good work, and God bless you for your diligence.
Cris
In some email conversation with a lady about alien abduction, I told her that I was blest and informed by various resources which I listed, among them Exo Vaticana. She emailed me back with a copy of her correspondence with Guy Consolmagno wherein he answers her questions about Exo Vaticana claiming that is the work of a knave or a fool, who is claiming to be investigative journalist but more interested in impugning his character and the Vatican
Chris I was really enjoying your blog postings but this childish argument with Skiba is disheartening.
My opinion in this like my other one is this:
Paul was battling a bunch of religious Jews who many I’m sure where ritualistic Kabalistic pharisee’s who wanted the Gentiles to keep the whole law and traditions to earn salvation which was completely wrong and dangerous for the Truth of Jesus. But now 2000 years later we take all those OT things such as Sabbaths and feasts and throw them out? I don’t think God is pleased with how we are treating HIS day of rest and HIS holidays.
I believe you need to lay this argument down, I can tell you that God is trying to point us back to these things to get us back on track. If you haven’t noticed the secular culture of Babylon has consumed the world. We are meant to be separate not blend in. But yet our whole lives are lived according to the worlds systems, work schedules, religious holidays, the way we do church, community and family. In My professional opinion we are dying in the spirit because we have forgotten the ways of YHVH. Celebrating Sabbaths and feasts are in no way a bad thing but rather very useful for getting our selves back on track. Although not essential for salvation they are a very wise thing to follow.
One more thing; if Feasts are obsolete how do explain that not all the feasts of been literally fulfilled? If these holidays were not transcending both covenants why would 3 be left unfulfilled?
There is strong evidence the final fulfillment will be the second coming, so where does that leave all the people who think the feasts are obsolete if the Feast of Trumpets is the second coming?
One thing is for sure God really cares about his feasts and Sabbaths when your read the OT, how can you be so sure he doesn’t care about them at all anymore?
Cris, I like you work. I hope all this has challenged you to study the apparent contradictions. Sometimes it is hard to see the truth when it is not what we have been told and is contrary to our selfish desires. Don’t stop digging.
Your Brother.
Chris, you are in error. The Law of God is in effect as long as this earth is in place. See Mat.5:17-19. It is crystal clear.
The expectations & instructions God gave to the Children of Abraham at Mount Sinai apply to all those who claim the promises given to them as well. Yeshua is returning for a bride who has been preparing for His return by rehearsing for the Wedding Feast and observing the instructions The Almighty requires of His Children to obey. Believe in both Greek and Hebrew means to trust & obey… Hupotasso, Strong’s # 5293, from hupo, “under” and tasso, “to order”. “To place in an orderly fashion under” (Zodhiates). Hence, to obey, to be under obedience, to be submitted to.
Peitho, Strong’s # 3982 and related words, “to be persuaded, to listen to, to obey” (Vine). It is closely related to pisteuo, to trust, to have faith; Vine says “the difference in meaning is that the former implies the obedience that is produced by the latter.”
Phulasso, Strong’s #5442, to watch, to guard, hence by implication to observe. One of its meanings is to observe or keep a commandment or law.
Tereo, Strong’s #5083 and related words, to keep, to guard, to observe or fulfill a command.
Yahshua observed all the feasts and the 7th day Sabbath. But as Christians, we’re not supposed to also? I beg to differ, my friends.
Amen Brother!
Amen Cris! We aren’t under old covenant law. We are under new covenant law. We are no longer under types and shadows, the body has arrived. We have Christ now. He put the Spirit in our heart..the terms of the new covenant which is eternal life the divine nature. It’s sad to see people stuck on types and shadows when they could have Christ Himself. Circumcision isn’t even required anymore. Titus didn’t even get circumcused. Both Paul and Titus wouldn’t put up with those types for an hour. The yoke of Jesus is so much easier. Simplicity in Christ.
And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment. 1 John 3:23
But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised: And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage: To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.
Galatians 2:3-5