Should Christians observe the OT feasts?

[Drew]

Transgression
Original Word: παράβασις, εως, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: parabasis
Phonetic Spelling: (par-ab'-as-is)
Short Definition: a transgression
Definition: a transgression, overstepping, deviation


3847 parábasis (from 3844 /pará, "contrary" and bainō, "go") – properly, an "overstepping" (BAGD); a deliberate going over "the line." 3847 ("a stepping over the line") in the NT refers to the willful disregard (breaking) of God's law which defies His drawn-lines (boundaries); an arrogant "over-stepping

All I have done is quote scripture, but yet you say my words or unbiblical?, but my words are not my words they are the word of Paul inspired thru the spirit, would this not mean your calling the bible unbiblical?

You are simply not seeing the distinction that Paul argues for in Romans 5.

A transgression is, exactly as you point out, a stepping over a defined line. So the Law functions do draw the line. So, indeed, where there is no "line" (i.e.) law, there is, of course no transgression. I assume we agree on this.

But, and this is key, the "act" that is still there even if there is no line. So people "sin" even without law - they still do the act that brings death, even though there is no "standard" that shows the act to be a transgression.

You continue to ignore the Romans 5 argument. Why is that? Romans 5 makes precisely the point I am making. Sin was in the world before the Law of Moses!!!! This is devastating to your position, because it shows that sin exists even in the absence of Law. To make the point even more clear, Paul shows that people who lived before Moses sinned even if they did not, yes, violate a commandment (law) such as the one that Adam was given by God - "do not eat of the fruit of that tree".

And there are many other texts that show that Paul believes that sin exists even in the absence of Law. Romans 7 makes this case, where Paul is crystal clear that "sin" has a dimension over and above mere "law-breaking" (transgression):

What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? May it never be! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law;

In order for this to be a sensible statement, sin has to be a kind of thing that "exists" apart from the Law, precisely because the Law functions to reveal it.